Invest ideasNews
15 Apr 2026, 05:22
XRP surges as Rakuten enables payments at 5 million stores
🪙 XRP now accepted at 5 million Rakuten stores in Japan. XRP price surged to $1.38 after the new integration. Continue Reading: XRP surges as Rakuten enables payments at 5 million stores The post XRP surges as Rakuten enables payments at 5 million stores appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .
15 Apr 2026, 05:20
Why is XRP stuck below $1.40 despite ETF inflows and rising OI?
The cryptocurrency market has slightly retraced following its recent rally. Bitcoin has dropped to the $74,300 level, while Ether is trading around $2,330, down by more than 1% in the last 24 hours. Ripple’s XRP is also down by 0.5% since Tuesday and is now hovering around $1.35 per coin. It has failed to take out the $1.40 resistance level once again and could record further losses in the near term. XRP ETFs, derivatives gain on renewed investor interest XRP is down by less than 1% in the last 24 hours despite a mild return in risk appetite from both institutional and retail market participants. According to CoinGlass , US-listed XRP spot Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) extended a three-day bullish streak, attracting $10.9 million in inflows on Tuesday and roughly $1.46 million on Monday. Cumulative inflows now stand at $1.23 billion, with net assets under management averaging $966 million. If the risk-on sentiment holds and draws investor interest, XRP could gain momentum, driving prices above $1.40. In addition to that, XRP is currently experiencing a mild influx of retail capital, as futures OI rises to $2.47 billion on Wednesday, from $2.38 billion recorded on Monday. A growing, liquid derivatives market could serve as a foundation for sustained price recovery. However, XRP’s OI remains incredibly low from the $10.94 billion record numbers it achieved in July when its price hit the $3.66 all-time high. The growth in derivatives demand underpins investor confidence and supports sustained price increases. XRP struggles to break $1.40 resistance The XRP/USD 4-hour chart remains bearish and efficient as Ripple has failed to break above the $1.40 resistance once again. It is currently trading at $1.35, maintaining a bearish near-term bias as it holds beneath the major moving averages. XRP remains capped first by the 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA) at $1.41, with the 100-day EMA at $1.56 and the longer-term 200-day EMA at $1.81 reinforcing a broader downside tone. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) at 51 on the 4-hour chart is broadly neutral, suggesting a consolidation phase rather than a sharp downside move. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) is also modestly positive on the same chart, hinting that any recovery attempts could struggle while this overhead resistance remains intact. If the bulls push harder, XRP could encounter immediate resistance at the 50-day EMA near $1.41. A daily candle close above this level would ease current pressure and open the way toward the 100-day EMA around $1.56. An extended rally would allow the bulls to target the $1.73 resistance, followed by the 200-day EMA near $1.81, which forms a broader supply zone that would need to be cleared to support a sustainable bullish reversal. However, if the $1.40 resistance remains in play, XRP could retest the weekly low of $1.32 over the next few hours or days. The next major support stands at the $1.30 level. The post Why is XRP stuck below $1.40 despite ETF inflows and rising OI? appeared first on Invezz
15 Apr 2026, 05:20
Bitcoin Security Crisis: Urgent Debate Over Freezing $74 Billion in BTC Threatened by Quantum Attacks
BitcoinWorld Bitcoin Security Crisis: Urgent Debate Over Freezing $74 Billion in BTC Threatened by Quantum Attacks The Bitcoin community faces a critical security dilemma as developers debate freezing approximately 1.7 million BTC vulnerable to quantum computing attacks, including coins potentially belonging to Satoshi Nakamoto valued at $74 billion. This unprecedented proposal represents one of the most significant security challenges in Bitcoin’s 16-year history, forcing the network to confront fundamental questions about autonomy versus protection. The discussion emerged publicly in March 2025 following increased awareness of quantum computing advancements and their potential to break traditional cryptographic security. Bitcoin Quantum Attack Vulnerability Explained Quantum computers threaten Bitcoin’s security through their ability to solve mathematical problems that protect traditional digital signatures. Specifically, these advanced machines could potentially break the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) that secures Bitcoin transactions. The vulnerability primarily affects early Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) addresses created before 2010, which publicly expose the public key in their transaction history. Once quantum computers achieve sufficient power, they could theoretically reverse-engineer the private key from the public key, allowing unauthorized access to funds. Approximately 1.7 million BTC remain in these vulnerable addresses today. This represents about 8% of Bitcoin’s total circulating supply. The most notable vulnerable holdings include: Early miner rewards from Bitcoin’s first two years of operation Satoshi Nakamoto’s suspected holdings estimated at 1.1 million BTC Other pioneer addresses from Bitcoin’s earliest adopters Security researchers estimate that quantum computers capable of breaking ECDSA could emerge within the next decade. Consequently, the Bitcoin community must address this vulnerability before it becomes an immediate threat. The proposed solution involves implementing a network-level freeze on these vulnerable UTXOs, preventing their movement until owners upgrade to quantum-resistant addresses. Technical Implementation and Network Impact The proposed freeze mechanism would operate at the consensus layer, requiring a soft fork or hard fork implementation. Developers suggest creating a new transaction validation rule that identifies and restricts vulnerable UTXO spending. This approach would maintain blockchain continuity while protecting at-risk funds. However, implementation presents significant technical challenges, including accurate identification of all vulnerable addresses and ensuring backward compatibility. Jameson Lopp, Bitcoin Core developer and Casa co-founder, emphasized the stakes in recent technical discussions. “If quantum attackers compromise these funds, the resulting market panic could devastate Bitcoin’s value proposition,” Lopp stated. “We must balance security with Bitcoin’s foundational principles.” His comments reflect the technical community’s divided perspectives on appropriate responses. Vulnerable Bitcoin Holdings by Address Type Address Type Approximate BTC Value (USD) Primary Risk Factor Early P2PK Addresses 1,700,000 $74 billion Public key exposure Satoshi Suspected Holdings 1,100,000 $48 billion Historical vulnerability Other Pioneer Addresses 600,000 $26 billion Legacy security models Expert Perspectives on Network Security Cryptography experts note that quantum resistance represents the next major evolution in blockchain security. Dr. Michele Mosca, co-founder of the Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo, previously warned that there’s “a one in seven chance that fundamental public-key cryptography will be broken by quantum computers by 2026.” While timelines remain debated, the cryptographic community generally agrees that preparation must begin years before quantum supremacy arrives. Bitcoin developers have explored quantum-resistant alternatives for several years. Potential solutions include: Post-quantum cryptography algorithms like lattice-based or hash-based signatures Multi-signature schemes with quantum-resistant components Time-lock mechanisms requiring extended confirmation periods Hybrid approaches combining traditional and quantum-resistant cryptography Each solution presents trade-offs between security, transaction size, and verification speed. The current debate centers on whether to implement protective measures proactively or reactively. Proponents argue that early action prevents catastrophic loss, while opponents contend that mandatory changes violate Bitcoin’s permissionless nature. Philosophical Conflict and Community Division The freeze proposal has ignited intense philosophical debate within Bitcoin circles. Critics argue that network-level intervention contradicts Bitcoin’s core principles of individual sovereignty and censorship resistance. They maintain that users should bear responsibility for securing their own funds and upgrading their security practices. Furthermore, opponents question whether developers should make decisions affecting assets they don’t control, particularly Satoshi Nakamoto’s presumed holdings. Supporters counter that systemic risks require systemic solutions. They compare the quantum threat to discovered vulnerabilities in other technologies that required coordinated patching. “Just as internet protocols evolved to address security flaws, Bitcoin must adapt to existential threats,” argued a developer in recent mailing list discussions. This perspective emphasizes Bitcoin’s survival as paramount, even if requiring temporary deviations from ideological purity. The debate reflects broader tensions between Bitcoin’s original vision and practical realities of maintaining a $1.3 trillion ecosystem. Similar philosophical conflicts emerged during previous technical debates, including block size increases and Taproot adoption. However, the quantum threat presents unique challenges due to its potential for irreversible fund loss rather than mere network inefficiency. Historical Context and Precedent Bitcoin has faced security challenges before, but never of this magnitude. In 2010, developers discovered and fixed an inflation bug that could have created unlimited Bitcoin. In 2013, a critical vulnerability required emergency patching to prevent blockchain splits. These incidents established precedents for developer intervention during existential threats. However, previous fixes addressed protocol flaws rather than restricting user funds. The closest historical parallel involves the 2017 Bitcoin fork that created Bitcoin Cash. That event demonstrated how philosophical differences could split the network. The quantum debate risks similar division, potentially creating separate chains with different security approaches. Already, community forums show deepening polarization between maximalist and pragmatic factions. Market Implications and Investor Concerns The quantum vulnerability discussion has prompted serious consideration among institutional investors and regulatory bodies. Major cryptocurrency custodians have begun evaluating their exposure to vulnerable addresses and developing migration strategies. Several exchanges have announced plans to proactively move funds from legacy addresses to quantum-resistant formats, though this requires private key access that may not exist for dormant holdings. Market analysts note several potential outcomes: Short-term volatility as uncertainty affects investor confidence Increased due diligence on Bitcoin holdings’ security characteristics Regulatory scrutiny of cryptocurrency security standards Insurance market development for quantum-related risks Valuation divergence between quantum-resistant and vulnerable Bitcoin The $74 billion at stake represents significant market concentration risk. If compromised, these funds could flood the market, dramatically affecting Bitcoin’s price and liquidity. Even the perception of vulnerability might influence trading behavior, creating self-fulfilling market dynamics. Consequently, the debate extends beyond technical circles to encompass broader economic considerations. Timeline and Implementation Challenges Quantum computing development follows an uncertain trajectory. Current estimates suggest breaking 256-bit ECDSA would require quantum computers with millions of qubits and exceptional error correction. Present technology remains orders of magnitude below this threshold. However, cryptographic experts recommend beginning migration years before capability arrives, as address upgrades require coordinated effort across the ecosystem. Implementation challenges include: Identifying all vulnerable addresses across Bitcoin’s entire history Creating upgrade paths for users with lost keys or inactive addresses Maintaining network consensus during transition periods Educating users about necessary security upgrades Coordinating with exchanges, custodians, and wallet providers The Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) process typically requires extensive testing and community review. Previous major upgrades like SegWit and Taproot took years from proposal to activation. Quantum resistance measures would likely follow similar timelines, emphasizing the need for early action despite uncertain threat horizons. Conclusion The Bitcoin quantum attack vulnerability debate represents a pivotal moment for cryptocurrency security and philosophy. The proposed freeze of 1.7 million BTC addresses fundamental questions about protocol evolution, user responsibility, and systemic risk management. As quantum computing advances, the Bitcoin community must balance its foundational principles with practical security requirements. The outcome will shape not only Bitcoin’s resilience but also establish precedents for how decentralized networks address existential technological threats. Regardless of the specific solution adopted, the discussion highlights cryptocurrency’s ongoing evolution from ideological experiment to institutional-grade financial infrastructure requiring robust security frameworks. FAQs Q1: What makes early Bitcoin addresses vulnerable to quantum attacks? Early Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) addresses expose public keys in their transaction history. Quantum computers could potentially reverse-engineer private keys from these public keys using Shor’s algorithm, allowing unauthorized access to funds. Q2: How soon could quantum computers break Bitcoin’s cryptography? Estimates vary widely among experts. Most researchers believe practical quantum attacks remain 5-15 years away, but preparation must begin years in advance due to the complexity of upgrading a decentralized network. Q3: Does the freeze proposal affect all Bitcoin holders? No. The proposal specifically targets approximately 1.7 million BTC in early P2PK addresses, representing about 8% of circulating supply. Modern address types like P2PKH and P2WPKH don’t share the same vulnerability. Q4: What happens to frozen Bitcoin if the proposal passes? Frozen UTXOs would remain on the blockchain but couldn’t be spent until moved to quantum-resistant addresses through an approved upgrade process. The funds wouldn’t be destroyed or confiscated, merely restricted from movement. Q5: Are other cryptocurrencies vulnerable to quantum attacks? Yes. Most cryptocurrencies using ECDSA or similar cryptography face quantum threats. However, some newer projects incorporate quantum-resistant algorithms from inception. The Bitcoin debate may influence security approaches across the entire cryptocurrency sector. This post Bitcoin Security Crisis: Urgent Debate Over Freezing $74 Billion in BTC Threatened by Quantum Attacks first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
15 Apr 2026, 05:08
Dogecoin (DOGE) Stuck Under $0.10, Bulls Can’t Force Break Higher
Dogecoin corrected some gains from the $0.0980 zone against the US Dollar. DOGE is now holding the $0.0920 support and remains at risk of more losses. DOGE price started a fresh downside correction below $0.0950. The price is trading above the $0.0920 level and the 100-hourly simple moving average. There is a bullish trend line forming with support at $0.0932 on the hourly chart of the DOGE/USD pair (data source from Kraken). The price could aim for a fresh increase if it remains stable above $0.0920. Dogecoin Price Dips Again Dogecoin price started a downside correction after it failed to surpass $0.0980, like Bitcoin and Ethereum . DOGE declined below the $0.0960 and $0.0950 levels. There was a move below the 50% Fib retracement level of the upward move from the $0.0903 swing low to the $0.0980 high. The price even spiked below $0.0930 before the bulls appeared. Dogecoin price is now trading above the $0.0920 level and the 100-hourly simple moving average. Besides, there is a bullish trend line forming with support at $0.0932 on the hourly chart of the DOGE/USD pair. Immediate resistance on the upside is near the $0.09430 level. The first major resistance for the bulls could be near the $0.0952 level. The next major resistance is near the $0.0965 level. A close above the $0.0965 resistance might send the price toward $0.0980. Any more gains might send the price toward $0.0988. The next major stop for the bulls might be $0.10. More Losses In DOGE? If DOGE’s price fails to climb above the $0.0952 level, it could continue to move down. Initial support on the downside is near the $0.0932 level and the trend line. The next major support is near the $0.09220 level or the 76.4% Fib retracement level of the upward move from the $0.0903 swing low to the $0.0980 high. The main support sits at $0.090. If there is a downside break below the $0.090 support, the price could decline further. In the stated case, the price might slide toward the $0.0880 level. Any more losses might call for a test of $0.0850. Technical Indicators Hourly MACD – The MACD for DOGE/USD is now gaining momentum in the bearish zone. Hourly RSI (Relative Strength Index) – The RSI for DOGE/USD is now below the 50 level. Major Support Levels – $0.0920 and $0.0900. Major Resistance Levels – $0.0952 and $0.0965.
15 Apr 2026, 05:00
BlackRock’s Q1 2026 earnings report marks a 17% YoY growth – Details
Bitcoin ETFs become the largest driver behind the asset manager, recording a net income of $2.2 billion in Q1 2026.
15 Apr 2026, 05:00
Bitcoin, Ethereum Surge As $430M Short Squeeze Fuels Rally
Data shows the cryptocurrency derivatives market has faced a high amount of short liquidations following the rallies in Bitcoin and Ethereum. Crypto Market Liquidations Have Crossed $535 Million According to data from CoinGlass , liquidations have piled up on cryptocurrency derivatives exchanges following the market volatility of the last 24 hours. “ Liquidation ” here refers to the forceful closure that any open contract undergoes after it has amassed losses of a certain percentage (as specified by the platform). Below is a table that shows the relevant numbers related to the latest liquidations in the cryptocurrency sector. In total, the market as a whole has suffered nearly $547 million in liquidations over the past day. Out of these, $446 million in contracts involved were short positions. This means that investors betting on a bearish outcome made up for over 81% of the liquidations. The dominance of short liquidations is naturally down to the fact that Bitcoin and other assets have gone up during the past day. When broken down in terms of the individual symbols, BTC-related contracts appear on top, with $229 million worth of them getting flushed inside this window. As is usually the case, Ethereum followed Bitcoin in second with $136 million in contracts involved. But interestingly, the third-largest asset in this metric wasn’t one of the usual suspects, but rather RaveDAO (RAVE) , the asset currently ranked 27th by market cap. RaveDAO observing significant liquidations of $45 million is likely a result of the sharp 62% jump that it has witnessed over the last 24 hours. A Mass liquidation event like today’s is popularly known as a squeeze. Since this squeeze involved bearish bets in the majority, it would be called a short squeeze. A property of a squeeze is that it involves a cascade of liquidations; an initial sharp swing in the price causes a market flush, which ends up feeding back into the price move, leading to further liquidations. As such, these events tend to be violent. Liquidation squeezes aren’t exactly a rare sight in the cryptocurrency market, owing to the fact that coins can be volatile on a regular basis and positions tend to be overleveraged. Thus, while some positions have been flushed in the latest squeeze, it doesn’t mean that the risk of further liquidations has gone away. The next investors affected could be those going long. As analytics firm Santiment has pointed out in an X post , the Ethereum Funding Rates have turned positive across exchanges, indicating the market balance has shifted toward long positions. Generally, a squeeze is more likely to affect the side of the market that’s more dominant. Since the Funding Rates currently point to that side being the bullish investors, it’s possible that they could end up getting wrapped in a squeeze, should more volatility emerge. BTC Price Bitcoin pulled back to $70,500 on Monday, but the coin has kicked off Tuesday with a surge to $74,300.
