Circle defends USDC freeze policy after Drift exploit, calls for faster legal frameworks

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-04-10Actualizado a 2026-04-10

Resumen

Circle has responded to criticism regarding its handling of illicit funds, particularly after the Drift Protocol exploit where over $270 million was drained. The company stated that it cannot freeze USDC assets without legal authorization from relevant authorities, emphasizing that freezing is a legal obligation, not a discretionary action. This follows a report alleging $420 million in compliance lapses due to delayed or absent freezes, including $230 million in USDC during the Drift incident. Circle argues that the mismatch between blockchain speed and legal processes creates structural gaps exploited by bad actors. The company calls for updated legal frameworks, such as the GENIUS and CLARITY Acts, to enable faster intervention while preserving due process and property rights.

Circle has responded to recent criticism over its handling of illicit fund flows. It argues that it cannot freeze assets without legal authorization, following scrutiny tied to the Drift Protocol exploit.

In a blog post published on 10 April, the company said its ability to freeze USDC is “not discretionary,” but instead depends on lawful orders from relevant authorities.

The statement comes days after an on-chain report alleged more than $420 million in compliance lapses linked to delayed or absent freezes.

“Freezing is a legal obligation, not a discretionary tool”

Circle pushed back on the idea that it can act unilaterally to block funds, stating that USDC operates within U.S. and European regulatory frameworks.

According to the company, freezing assets requires a formal legal process. Also, acting outside those constraints could undermine property rights and financial privacy.

The distinction is central to its response: while the technology enables blacklisting, Circle maintains that the decision to act must come from law enforcement or the courts, not the issuer itself.

Drift exploit brought response times into focus

The clarification follows criticism tied to the 1 April exploit of Drift Protocol, during which over $270 million was reportedly drained.

Reports claimed that more than $230 million in USDC was bridged across chains during the incident without being frozen. The event raised questions about how quickly issuers can respond in fast-moving exploit scenarios.

The report also cited past incidents — including Cetus, Mango Markets, and Nomad — where USDC-linked funds were allegedly frozen late or not at all.

Circle’s response does not directly address specific cases. Instead, it reframes the issue as a legal constraint rather than an operational failure.

A gap between technology and law

A key theme in Circle’s statement is what it describes as a mismatch between the speed of blockchain activity and the pace of legal processes.

While tools exist to intervene quickly, the company argues that current regulatory frameworks do not allow for rapid, coordinated action without due process.

This, it says, creates a structural gap that can be exploited by bad actors moving funds across chains in real time.

Policy push gains momentum

Circle explicitly linked the issue to ongoing regulatory efforts in the United States, including the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act.

The company called for updated legal frameworks that would enable faster intervention while preserving due process, privacy, and property rights.

The timing is notable. Recent signals from U.S. officials, alongside a White House report challenging restrictions on stablecoin yield, suggest growing alignment within the executive branch on digital asset policy.


Final Summary

  • Circle says it cannot freeze USDC without legal orders, pushing back against criticism following the Drift exploit.
  • The company is calling for faster legal frameworks, linking enforcement challenges to ongoing U.S. regulatory efforts.

Criptos en tendencia

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is Circle's stated reason for not freezing USDC assets unilaterally following incidents like the Drift Protocol exploit?

ACircle states that it cannot freeze USDC assets without lawful orders from relevant authorities, as its ability to freeze is a legal obligation, not a discretionary tool, and acting unilaterally could undermine property rights and financial privacy.

QHow much USDC was reportedly bridged across chains during the Drift Protocol exploit without being frozen, according to the article?

AReports claimed that more than $230 million in USDC was bridged across chains during the Drift Protocol exploit without being frozen.

QWhat does Circle identify as the key structural problem in responding to fast-moving exploits involving cross-chain fund transfers?

ACircle identifies a mismatch between the speed of blockchain activity and the pace of legal processes as the key structural problem, creating a gap that can be exploited by bad actors moving funds in real time.

QWhich specific U.S. regulatory acts does Circle link to its call for updated legal frameworks in the article?

ACircle links its call for updated legal frameworks to the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act in the United States.

QBesides the Drift exploit, which other past incidents are cited in the report as examples of alleged USDC freezing delays or failures?

AThe report also cited past incidents involving Cetus, Mango Markets, and Nomad where USDC-linked funds were allegedly frozen late or not at all.

Lecturas Relacionadas

human.tech Launches Clean SDK for Privacy-First Web3 Apps

human.tech has launched the Clean SDK, a toolkit enabling developers to build privacy-first Web3 applications with transparent accountability. Released alongside Aztec's version 5, the SDK provides components for integrating zero-knowledge identity verification, sanctions screening, and private transactions, without developers handling sensitive user data or building compliance infrastructure from scratch. It uses zero-knowledge proofs and programmable verification to allow apps to confirm user legitimacy and sanctions compliance while keeping identities confidential. The first application built on the SDK, Shield, a privacy bridge to Aztec, also launched. It allows users to transfer assets privately while proving a unique human is behind each transfer and that funds have passed sanctions checks, as verified by a May 2026 audit. The SDK offers three core verification techniques: Proof of Innocence (sanctions screening against 23 sources), Proof of Personhood (simpler verification via Human Passport), and Proof of Clean Hands (higher-assurance zero-knowledge government ID checks). This allows apps to authenticate users and transactions without exposing personal data. Designed for Aztec builders, the SDK lets developers add programmable privacy to decentralized apps, eliminating the need to create their own verification and ZK infrastructure. Shield demonstrates its practical use for private bridges, but the SDK aims to enable a wider ecosystem of private, accountable financial apps and services. The launch addresses growing demand for infrastructure that balances privacy and accountability. The SDK avoids traditional identity databases, storing encrypted data off-chain, screening at both entry and exit points, and including a gated disclosure mechanism for legal requests. human.tech's products, including the Clean SDK, focus on using zero-knowledge technology to enable verifiable personhood and privacy in digital systems.

TheNewsCryptoHace 30 min(s)

human.tech Launches Clean SDK for Privacy-First Web3 Apps

TheNewsCryptoHace 30 min(s)

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

Pump.fun, a popular meme coin launchpad, has introduced a new standard mechanism called BOOST. It aims to address a significant capital efficiency issue: when a newly launched token graduates from its initial bonding curve to a liquidity pool (LP), roughly 20% of its liquidity becomes permanently locked as "dead liquidity," estimated to waste over $100 million annually. Instead of locking these funds permanently, BOOST repurposes them. Upon a token's migration, approximately 20% of the settlement funds (e.g., 17.6 SOL or ~$2516 USDC) are used to buy back the token on the open market over a 5-minute period via a Time-Weighted Average Price (TWAP) mechanism. All purchased tokens are immediately burned. This creates a brief, systematic buy pressure immediately after migration, potentially generating a short-term price surge ("pump") while permanently reducing the token's circulating supply. The goal is to enhance the immediate post-launch trading experience, potentially increasing trader retention and sustainable protocol revenue, which funds ongoing token buybacks. However, concerns exist that this artificial 5-minute boost could lower the barrier for launching low-quality tokens and lead to steeper price crashes once the buy pressure stops, if followed by large sell-offs. The feature automatically applies to tokens migrating after July 21, 2024, but not to previously migrated tokens or those launched via the Mayhem AI Agent lab.

marsbitHace 37 min(s)

Unlocking $100 Million in Liquidity? Pump.fun's New Policy Tests the 5-Minute Pump Technique

marsbitHace 37 min(s)

Podcast Notes | Conversation with GSR Asset Management Head: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Watch the Lending Rates on Aave

Podcast Summary: Dialogue with GSR's Head of Asset Management: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Check Lending Rates on Aave Andy Baehr, Managing Director of Asset Management at GSR, discusses the current crypto market, characterizing it as stuck in a state of "ambivalence" with short-lived, unsustainable rallies. He outlines a simple framework: the market moves between "ambivalence" and "conviction" (sustained upward momentum). Currently, every rally resembles a single-stage rocket booster that quickly fizzles out. Baehr identifies three key signals to watch: 1) DeFi lending rates, 2) the potential passage of the CLARITY Act, and 3) the market forming a consensus on the "Fed hawkish peak." He emphasizes that the most immediate indicator for the sustainability of the recent CPI-triggered rally is the USDC borrowing rate on Aave, currently around 3.75%—close to U.S. Treasury yields. The absence of a credit spread indicates low leverage demand and a lack of market energy. He explains that a healthy, sustained rally requires layered buying pressure. Last year's rally progressed from an ETH short squeeze to crypto-native trader influx and finally to ETF inflows. Currently, this structure is missing. Other potential structural buyers like Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) companies are absent, and ETF flows have proven transient. Baehr notes that while small-cap crypto tokens outperformed large caps in Q2—a potential sign of capitation in major assets—capital is also flowing to more exciting opportunities like AI stocks and tech IPOs, leaving crypto sidelined. Regarding DeFi, he highlights that platforms like Aave provide a clear, real-time signal of leverage demand through their supply/demand-driven interest rates. A significant, sustained rate increase would signal genuine market conviction. He also observes the quiet emergence of fixed-income-like products and vaults in DeFi. On regulation, the probability of the CLARITY Act passing before the August 7th deadline has dropped linearly from 75% to below 40% on Polymarket. Baehr suggests its passage would be treated as a bullish surprise, a potent driver for price movement. However, political hurdles, including ethical clause debates and disclosures about the First Family's crypto profits, remain significant obstacles. Ultimately, the market awaits clarity on the Fed's terminal rate under Chair Warsh. Until the "Fed Solstice"—the point where the market collectively understands the peak of hawkish policy—sustained conviction will be difficult to achieve.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Podcast Notes | Conversation with GSR Asset Management Head: To Determine if This Crypto Rally is Real, Just Watch the Lending Rates on Aave

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot

Artículos destacados

Cómo comprar DRIFT

¡Bienvenido a HTX.com! Hemos hecho que comprar Drift Protocol (DRIFT) sea simple y conveniente. Sigue nuestra guía paso a paso para iniciar tu viaje de criptos.Paso 1: crea tu cuenta HTXUtiliza tu correo electrónico o número de teléfono para registrarte y obtener una cuenta gratuita en HTX. Experimenta un proceso de registro sin complicaciones y desbloquea todas las funciones.Obtener mi cuentaPaso 2: ve a Comprar cripto y elige tu método de pagoTarjeta de crédito/débito: usa tu Visa o Mastercard para comprar Drift Protocol (DRIFT) al instante.Saldo: utiliza fondos del saldo de tu cuenta HTX para tradear sin problemas.Terceros: hemos agregado métodos de pago populares como Google Pay y Apple Pay para mejorar la comodidad.P2P: tradear directamente con otros usuarios en HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): ofrecemos servicios personalizados y tipos de cambio competitivos para los traders.Paso 3: guarda tu Drift Protocol (DRIFT)Después de comprar tu Drift Protocol (DRIFT), guárdalo en tu cuenta HTX. Alternativamente, puedes enviarlo a otro lugar mediante transferencia blockchain o utilizarlo para tradear otras criptomonedas.Paso 4: tradear Drift Protocol (DRIFT)Tradear fácilmente con Drift Protocol (DRIFT) en HTX's mercado spot. Simplemente accede a tu cuenta, selecciona tu par de trading, ejecuta tus trades y monitorea en tiempo real. Ofrecemos una experiencia fácil de usar tanto para principiantes como para traders experimentados.

308 Vistas totalesPublicado en 2024.12.11Actualizado en 2026.06.02

Cómo comprar DRIFT

Discusiones

Bienvenido a la comunidad de HTX. Aquí puedes mantenerte informado sobre los últimos desarrollos de la plataforma y acceder a análisis profesionales del mercado. A continuación se presentan las opiniones de los usuarios sobre el precio de DRIFT (DRIFT).

活动图片