Invest ideasNews
5 May 2026, 06:00
Solana Co-Founder Warns AI Could Break Post-Quantum Crypto Schemes
Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko has warned that the most pressing risk around post-quantum cryptography may not be quantum computers themselves, but the possibility that AI could expose weaknesses in the signature schemes designed to defend against them. His comments add a sharper edge to Solana’s recent quantum-readiness push, which has centered on Falcon signatures, migration planning and wallet-level resilience. The exchange began after developer Dean Little highlighted progress on a Solana Falcon implementation, saying version “0.1.2 now costs just ~173–183k CUs to verify,” with Lean and Kani proofs expected next. That prompted Yakovenko to suggest deeper native support inside Solana’s transaction architecture, writing : “Syscall to lift PDA is_signer to the transaction processor, charge fees to valid signers at the end of the block. Make it so, pls.” Solana’s Post-Quantum Plan Gets New Scrutiny The more consequential remark came shortly after, when Yakovenko framed the problem less as a simple migration from today’s cryptography to post-quantum signatures, and more as a security-design issue with unresolved unknowns. “I think the biggest risk is that pqc signature schemes will get broken by ai,” Yakovenko wrote. “We don’t know all the implementation footguns even, let alone the math footguns. So we need to support 2/3 wallets for them. @fusewallet or ideally natively with PDAs in the tx processor.” The point is notable because Solana’s official messaging on quantum readiness has been broadly confident. In an April 27 developer post, Solana said quantum computing remains “years away” and that, if the threat materializes, migration work is “well-researched, understood, and ready to deploy.” The post described a roadmap built around continued research, adoption of a post-quantum scheme for new wallets if needed, and migration of existing wallets to the selected scheme. Solana’s current research track has converged around Falcon , a post-quantum digital signature scheme identified independently by Anza and Firedancer, two major validator client developers in the Solana ecosystem. According to Solana, both teams reached the same conclusion: the network would need a compact post-quantum signature format suited to high-throughput blockchain use. Initial implementations are already available through Firedancer and Anza repositories, while Solana argues that the transition would be manageable and should not create a meaningful performance hit. Yakovenko’s warning does not directly contradict that roadmap. It narrows the focus. Rather than questioning whether Solana can migrate to post-quantum cryptography when necessary, he is pointing to the fragility of assuming any single new cryptographic scheme will remain safe once both implementation details and mathematical assumptions are exposed to increasingly powerful AI-assisted analysis. That distinction matters for builders. The quantum-readiness debate often treats post-quantum signatures as the endpoint: once a chain can verify Falcon or a similar scheme efficiently, the network has a path forward. Yakovenko’s comments suggest the safer architecture may be one that avoids dependence on one scheme, even after migration. His preference for “2/3 different signature schemes” indicates a defense-in-depth model, where wallets or transaction processors could require threshold approval across multiple cryptographic primitives.Michael Egorov, founder of Curve Finance, asked whether “proper formal verification” might help address the concern. Yakovenko’s reply was cautious: “If we know exactly what to verify. I’d still like 2/3 different signature schemes.” That response captures the unresolved part of the debate. Formal verification can reduce implementation risk when the target properties are precisely defined. Yakovenko’s concern is that the industry may not yet know all the relevant failure modes, especially if AI systems become better at finding edge cases, deployment flaws or deeper mathematical weaknesses in post-quantum constructions. At press time, SOL traded at $84.03.
5 May 2026, 03:44
Western Union launches USDPT stablecoin on Solana for global transfers
🚀 Western Union launched its USDPT stablecoin on the Solana blockchain for international money transfers. USDPT is now available in Bolivia and the Philippines, with plans to expand to over 40 countries by 2026. 💡 Critical data: The stablecoin market is worth $317.3 billion and could surpass $2 trillion by 2030, signaling major growth ahead in $SOL-powered payments. Continue Reading: Western Union launches USDPT stablecoin on Solana for global transfers The post Western Union launches USDPT stablecoin on Solana for global transfers appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .
5 May 2026, 01:31
Meta taps Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan for $13B Texas data center financing
Meta is working with Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan on roughly $13 billion in financing for its El Paso data center campus, per a May 4 report. The package is mostly debt with a smaller equity slice. It could become one of the largest single-site digital infrastructure financings on record, though below Meta’s $27 billion Hyperion deal with Blue Owl in October 2025. Meta’s original commitment to El Paso, announced in October 2025, was $1.5 billion. The financing now under discussion is roughly eight times that, scaling the campus to about one gigawatt of capacity. The EL Paso deal moves data centers out of real estate financing A campus this size has outgrown traditional commercial real estate debt. Citigroup estimates the broader data center buildout could need $3 trillion by 2030. El Paso data center | Source: El Paso Times “If you can’t invest a billion dollars, we don’t even want to talk to you,” Adam Lewis, managing director at Citizens and head of its 35-person digital infrastructure, said . “We can read electrical diagrams and mechanical diagrams and understand land use permits and power configurations.” Scott Wilcoxen, JPMorgan’s global head of digital infrastructure investment banking, has focused on what he calls “time to power” as the industry’s biggest constraint. The El Paso deal sits in the same arc as Hyperion, but the structure is different. As Cryptopolitan reported , Hyperion was a joint venture, with Blue Owl owning 80 percent and Meta owning 20 percent through an SPV that raised $27 billion in bonds. El Paso is mostly straight debt, with Meta keeping more direct ownership. S&P calls hyperscale a concentrated risk S&P Global Ratings warned in a recent report that hyperscale data centers are emerging as a major concentration of insurable risk. A $13 billion financing tied to a single site, a single operator, and a single power configuration concentrates exposure in a way infrastructure debt has not historically faced. The numbers behind the demand explain the concentration. Meta spent $39 billion on infrastructure in 2024 and $72 billion in 2025. At its Q1 2026 earnings call on April 29, the company raised its 2026 capex guidance to $115 to $145 billion, up from the $115 to $135 billion it gave in January. Almost all of it is going toward AI data centers. CFO Susan Li has said Meta will remain compute-constrained through much of 2026. What the deal would set as a precedent If the El Paso financing closes at its current size, it sets a benchmark for how the next wave of mega-scale data centers will be debt-financed and how that risk will be priced. That matters beyond Meta. JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, SMBC, and MUFG are already exploring ways to offload data center exposure to outside investors through significant risk transfer deals, a sign that bank balance sheets are starting to feel the strain of AI infrastructure lending. There’s a middle ground between leaving money in the bank and rolling the dice in crypto. Start with this free video on decentralized finance .
5 May 2026, 01:07
Aave challenges $71M freeze as DeFi recovery collides with North Korea claims
Aave, a major decentralized finance (DeFi) liquidity protocol, is asking a U.S. federal court to lift a freeze on roughly $71 million in ETH. The firm argues that the assets belong to its users, not to a suspected North Korean hacker. The funds are currently locked on the Arbitrum network. The dispute highlights growing tension between DeFi recovery efforts and creditors seeking to enforce longstanding judgments against North Korea. In a court filing dated May 4, 2026, Aave said the court-ordered freeze is blocking the return of assets recovered following the Kelp DAO rsETH token exploit. In the meantime, the company is demanding an immediate lifting of the freeze. If the freeze stays, it requires a minimum $300 million bond from the plaintiffs. “Since the exploit occurred, teams from the Aave Protocol community, the Arbitrum community, and others in the global DeFi community have been working tirelessly as part of an effort called ‘DeFi United’ to return the frozen assets and other value to those affected by the Aave Protocol incident. They aim to restore stability and security within both the Aave Protocol and other protocols in the decentralized finance ecosystem while also ensuring that similar exploits do not happen again,” said the memo. Recent developments suggest that lawmakers are closer than ever to resolving those disputes. A bipartisan breakthrough on stablecoin yield restrictions has removed one of the biggest obstacles to progress, with negotiators now working on final language that would allow crypto rewards tied to user activity while limiting interest-like payments on idle balances. The Kelp DAO rsETH token exploit raises doubt over the Blockchain technology This dispute originated from a cyber breach in April involving Kelp DAO, a prominent liquid restaking protocol on Ethereum . In this scenario, a hacker exploited a vulnerability in a cross-chain bridge connected to the rsETH token. Afterward, the hacker exploited Aave by using illicitly obtained assets as collateral to borrow roughly $230 million in ETH. Shortly after the incident, as previously reported by Cryptopolitan, the Arbitrum protocol seized 30,766 ETH, worth about $73 million. It then reserved the assets for recovery. Analysts say the initial expectation was for the recovered ETH—the first major batch post-hack—to be returned to the victims. Later, this endeavor evolved into “DeFi United” pending ETH unfreezing decisions and other protocol votes. Notably, DeFi United is an emergency coalition of major crypto protocols—including Aave, Lido, and EtherFi—formed in April 2026 to restore rsETH backing after a $292 million Kelp DAO exploit. In this case, the plaintiffs, who hold unpaid judgments against North Korea, indicated a high likelihood that the attacker is linked to the regime’s Lazarus Group. Based on their argument, the frozen assets should be considered North Korean property and seized. In their filing, the plaintiffs began by admitting that the accusations regarding North Korea could be valid. “However, AaveLLC strongly disagrees with the idea that these issues can be legally resolved by restraining and seizing assets belonging to innocent third parties—specifically, users of the Aave software protocol (the ‘Aave Protocol’), who are completely unrelated to any alleged wrongdoing and have no known ties to North Korea,” they said. Despite uncertainty regarding the culprit, the hack had immediate consequences. Panic withdrawals quickly drained key lending pools, leaving them with critically low balances. These sudden mass withdrawals left some users unable to withdraw their deposits. The filing noted that the funds were seized directly from Aave users. This statement challenges the claim that they are associated with any alleged wrongdoer. It also casts doubt on whether Arbitrum DAO qualifies as a legal entity. Meanwhile, Aave refused to be an official entity subject to the plaintiffs’ method of service. This claim could create legal hurdles. Can stolen crypto be recovered without harming innocent users? Aave argues that freezing the assets is not only a legal issue but is actively hindering recovery from the Kelp DAO exploit. At this point, the attorneys for the plaintiffs stated that the Restraining Notice against Arbitrum DAO was not intended to assist in recovering funds for Aave Protocol victims; rather, they noted, it served the opposite purpose. In a statement, the founder and CEO of Aave, Stani Kulechov, stated that, “A thief does not own what he steals.” He compared the situation to a thief stealing diamonds, to have them snatched back. “These funds belong to the affected users they were stolen from — end of story,” he said. There’s a middle ground between leaving money in the bank and rolling the dice in crypto. Start with this free video on decentralized finance .
5 May 2026, 00:00
Top XRP Analyst Says Bears Will Be Proven Wrong In May 2026, But Why
Persistent skepticism around XRP’s price trajectory is misreading the asset’s moment, according to a prominent crypto researcher — and a recently surfaced panel video makes the case for why doubters are likely to come up short. Related Reading: Dogecoin (DOGE) Lifts Further, Momentum Points To More Gains SMQKE (@SMQKEDQG), a well-followed crypto researcher on X, recently shared footage from a Crypto Valley panel in Zurich in which Ripple’s Sales Director outlined the company’s growing infrastructure footprint. The post reignited a broader debate about whether XRP bears are underestimating what is quietly being built beneath the price chart. XRP enthusiast Tony (@_Sab3r_6) amplified the call, posting that critics “will be proven wrong” as the utility case becomes harder to dismiss. The Infrastructure Argument Bears Are Missing The Zurich panel provided the substance behind that conviction. Tania Griffith, Sales Director at Ripple, explained during the discussion that banks and financial institutions are becoming increasingly comfortable using crypto and blockchain rails for payments — a shift that would have seemed remote just a few years ago. Griffith noted that Ripple has moved from relying on a handful of exchanges with limited volume to building a global network of liquidity providers, stablecoins, and major financial infrastructure players. The result, she said, is straightforward: larger payments and better foreign exchange rates. The system now supports true 24/7, 365-day settlement — a capability traditional cross-border payment rails were never designed to deliver. Ripple’s approach, as described at the panel, treats blockchain and crypto as complementary to existing financial infrastructure rather than a replacement. XRP sits in the liquidity layer of that architecture, facilitating the movement of value between currencies and jurisdictions at speed. A Structural Case, Not A Sentiment Call This development marks a pivotal distinction for XRP in the current market cycle. The bear case has largely rested on price action and regulatory uncertainty. The bull case increasingly rests on adoption metrics and infrastructure depth — two things, as the panel made clear, that continue to expand regardless of short-term chart noise. Related Reading: Satoshi’s 22,000 Wallets Could Make Quantum Attacks On Bitcoin Far More Difficult: Expert As of this writing, XRP trades at around $2.11, holding steady after a week of consolidation. XRP's price trends sideways on the daily chart. Source: XRPUSD on Tradingview Cover image from Grok, XRPUSD chart from Tradingview
4 May 2026, 23:40
Shirtum crypto fraud case could top €24M as footballers face complaint
According to a new criminal complaint filed in Barcelona, a Spanish court is investigating six former Sevilla FC football players for their alleged role in a crypto scheme. The scheme allegedly sold fake NFTs and a manipulated token to investors, costing them over €24 million or $28 million. Papu Gómez, Lucas Ocampos, Ivan Rakitić, Nico Pareja, Alberto Moreno, and Javier Saviola are the players named in the complaint. According to El Correo de Andalucía, two more football players, Diego Perotti and Marcelo Guedes, were also involved in promoting the project. Thirteen investors from Spain filed a complaint with Barcelona’s Court of Instruction No. 5, saying they lost all of their money. Shirtum never delivered filmic NFTs Shirtum Europa, S.L.U., and other companies in Andorra ran the project, which advertised itself as a place to buy and sell digital football collectibles. It sold “filmic NFTs” with pictures and voice recordings of the accused players for about €450 each. The people who filed the complaint say that these NFTs were never actually created on any blockchain. The complaint said that the assets could not be sold or transferred, so they were an absolute simulation of the product sold. “These supposed NFTs technically never existed, were not transferable or resellable, and amounted to a complete simulation of the object sold to the detriment of the buyers,” based on one of the complaints. Investigators could not find any proof that the tokens were on-chain. Before the NFT sales, Shirtum’s promoters received ~€3 million in BNB tokens from investors to make a mobile app on iOS and Android. The complaint says that the app was never made, and the money was never returned or accounted for. The company’s annual accounts also didn’t show the money it made from NFT sales, which was about €1 million. The $SHI token and the pump-and-dump allegation There is another layer to the alleged fraud that involves Shirtum’s own crypto, $SHI. The expanded complaint says that out of the one billion tokens created, the four business promoters and the accused footballers got 78% or 780 million tokens for free. They then sold those tokens to retail investors on PancakeSwap for prices that were too high. The people who are complaining say that the accused used false advertising and worked with the football players to create FOMO (fear of missing out) to get people to buy. The complaint says that in July 2025, while a criminal investigation was already going on, the accused permanently removed $SHI’s liquidity from PancakeSwap. The price of the token fell. It doesn’t trade on any exchange anymore. According to CoinGecko, $SHI is trading at $0.00003329 and is basically worthless. Source: CoinGecko . Investors say that the $SHI token followed a pump and dump pattern. They think that the losses from the token manipulation alone will be at least €20 million, and the final number could be much higher. Barcelona’s Court of Instruction No. 5 is still looking into the case. The Spanish police had already started their own investigation into Shirtum. The new complaint adds the claims of token manipulation to the original NFT fraud claims. This means that more charges could be brought. Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free .
