Israeli Military Catching Insiders on Polymarket

Odaily星球日报Published on 2026-02-13Last updated on 2026-02-13

Abstract

Israeli military and civilian prosecutors have charged a reservist soldier and a civilian with using classified military information to profit from bets on the prediction market platform Polymarket. The suspects allegedly leveraged insider knowledge on the timing of military operations to place winning bets, netting over $150,000. One user, identified as "Rundeep," reportedly achieved a 100% success rate in six Israel-related predictions, often betting when odds were below 50%. The case highlights concerns about insider trading on prediction markets, especially regarding sensitive areas like military actions, where such activities could compromise operational security and potentially influence real-world outcomes. Regulatory scrutiny may follow as these platforms face growing scrutiny over their role in public affairs betting.

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

Insider information providing an unfair competitive advantage has long been a controversial focus on prediction markets like Polymarket.

Previously, during the US military's operation to capture Venezuelan President Maduro, the odds for related events on Polymarket showed abnormal movements ahead of time (see "When War is Settled Before the News: How Prediction Markets 'Priced' the Maduro Capture Operation 6 Days Early"). If that suspected insider activity could still be explained away by fluctuations in the "Pizza Index," then this time, it can be said that there is definitely an insider on Polymarket, completely confirmed.

Israeli Military Catching "Insiders" Internally

On February 12, Israel's largest English-language newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, reported that the Tel Aviv District Court indicted an Israeli civilian and an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) reservist on Monday, accusing the two of using classified military information to place bets on Polymarket for profit. The court revealed on Thursday that Israeli authorities believe this behavior poses a serious operational security risk during wartime.

According to a statement approved for release by the prosecution, the suspects were arrested in a joint operation by the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), the investigation unit under the Ministry of Defense's security agency, and the Israeli police. Investigators suspect that some reservists are using the classified information they access through their military duties to bet on the timing of military operations and profit from it.

Following the investigation, the prosecution stated that it has obtained evidence of misconduct by the civilian and the reservist and has therefore decided to indict the two on charges of "serious security crimes" as well as bribery and obstruction of justice. Meanwhile, the prosecution requested the court to extend the suspects' detention until the conclusion of the trial.

Apart from the information released above, more details of the case remain under a legal gag order, including the identities of the defendants, the specific betting content, and the alleged information flow situation.

Tracing the Insider's Activities

Although we cannot learn the true identity and account information of this insider, the X community had already discovered an account on Polymarket with clearly abnormal behavior. The Jerusalem Post also included a screenshot of this account's profits in its report.

As shown in the image above, this user named Rundeep joined Polymarket in June 2025 and subsequently achieved a 100% win rate in six prediction markets related to Israeli military actions, with five of those bets placed when the probability was below 50%, ultimately profiting over $150,000.

It is worth mentioning that Odaily Planet Daily found that Rundeep had only one loss on Polymarket aside from these "six wins in six attempts." However, this failed prediction was not directly related to Israel but was about "whether the US military would take action against Iran before Saturday (June 21, 2025)"... It seems allied intelligence isn't very reliable after all.

The Real-World Repercussions of Prediction Markets, Truly Frightening to Ponder

Due to Polymarket's open, permissionless nature, anyone can freely place bets on the platform, which objectively provides a more convenient channel for "monetizing information" for those with intelligence advantages — driven by profit, those holding unequal information advantages find it hard to resist the temptation, making it inevitable that insiders will step in to make money.

If such things happened in conventional areas like sports or entertainment, the impact might still be somewhat controllable. But when similar insider betting events occur in sensitive areas like politics or even war, the potential连带 (liándài -连带 means连带, chain, related) terrifying consequences are hard to imagine.

Taking this article as an example, if opposing forces guessed the direction of an Israeli operation in advance through insider betting on Polymarket before the action took place, could it have a huge impact on the subsequent evolution of events? Most people might not easily sympathize with Israel, but in fact, such events could happen to any entity.

In traditional gambling, public affairs such as political elections, legislative outcomes, and wars are usually subject to clear restrictions. Whether prediction markets will face similar regulatory restrictions in the future may involve a long-term regulatory博弈 (bóyì -博弈 means game theory,博弈, struggle,博弈).

Related Questions

QWhat is the main subject of the article regarding the Israeli military and Polymarket?

AThe article reports that the Israeli military is prosecuting a civilian and an IDF reservist for allegedly using classified military information to place bets and profit on the prediction market platform Polymarket.

QWhich user on Polymarket was identified by the X community as having suspiciously successful betting activity related to Israeli military actions?

AA user named Rundeep was identified, who achieved a 100% win rate across six prediction markets related to Israeli military actions, with five of those bets placed when the probability was below 50%, earning over $150,000.

QWhat potential risk does the article suggest that insider betting on platforms like Polymarket could pose in the context of military operations?

AThe article suggests that insider betting could pose a severe operational security risk in wartime, as opposing forces might detect upcoming military actions by observing suspicious betting patterns on the prediction market, potentially altering the course of events.

QWhat was the outcome of the single bet that the user Rundeep lost on Polymarket, and what was it about?

ARundeep's only lost bet was on the prediction 'Will the US military take action against Iran by Saturday (June 21, 2025)?', which was not directly related to Israeli operations.

QHow does the article contrast the regulation of traditional betting markets with prediction markets like Polymarket concerning public affairs?

AThe article notes that traditional betting markets often have explicit restrictions on public affairs like political elections, legislation, and war, and it suggests that prediction markets may face a long-term regulatory battle over similar restrictions in the future.

Related Reads

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

On June 11, Anthropic apologized not for a model failure, but for a lack of transparency. Its new Claude Fable 5 model was found to be secretly rerouting requests from users engaged in advanced AI model development to a weaker version, Opus 4.8, without any notification. The company's response—promising future notifications for such "downgrades"—was met with user skepticism. The article argues the core issue isn't technical but commercial: Anthropic's "safety" measures are primarily a business strategy. A key feature, the "intelligent safety classifier," marketed as user protection, is described as a tool for "competitive defense" to protect Anthropic's market lead by limiting rivals' research capabilities. This covert mechanism was designed for low "false positives," precisely targeting AI researchers. Anthropic's model involves a calculated three-step process: publishing alarming security research to amplify public anxiety, offering its Fable 5 model with a "safety classifier" as a premium-priced solution, and cashing in through a planned high-value IPO. This contrasts with OpenAI's more direct "tool-and-traffic" approach. The apology, merely changing a secret downgrade to a visible one, is seen as a business "patch" rather than a principled shift. The incident risks damaging Anthropic's "safest AI" reputation among the developer community, which underpins its valuation and appeal to government and corporate clients. Ultimately, the article concludes that for Anthropic, safety is a business, and the apology is merely customer service for that business.

marsbit44m ago

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

marsbit44m ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

**Summary:** A growing "anti-college" movement is gaining traction among elite circles in Silicon Valley, challenging the traditional value of a four-year university degree. Proponents argue that college has become an expensive, slow, and increasingly irrelevant waste of time, especially in the fast-paced tech world where opportunities pass by quickly. The movement is led by figures like billionaire Peter Thiel, who criticizes universities for high costs, ideological indoctrination, and stifling true innovation. His "Thiel Fellowship" pays young people to drop out and pursue ventures. Companies like Palantir Technologies (co-founded by Thiel) fuel this trend with programs like the "Meritocracy Fellowship," which offers high school graduates paid internships as an alternative to immediate college enrollment, promising a practical "Palantir Degree." Key drivers include: 1. **Economics:** Skyrocketing student debt versus the allure of immediate, high-paying tech jobs or startup funding. 2. **Technology:** AI and online tools lowering barriers to self-education and product development, making formal instruction seem inefficient. 3. **Culture:** A backlash against perceived "woke" ideology and DEI policies in universities, coupled with a belief that these institutions suppress meritocracy and masculine drive. The movement is notably male-dominated. Critics, like economist David Deming, warn against overgeneralizing from dropout success stories (survivorship bias). He emphasizes that genuine autodidacts are rare, corporate training is narrowly focused, and the "college wage premium" remains high for most people. University liberal arts education, he argues, builds adaptable problem-solving skills and broad perspectives. The debate highlights a deeper crisis in education. The core model of the modern university appears increasingly mismatched with the speed of the information age. The movement signals a shift in the locus of learning from institutional "education" to personal, active "learning" powered by the internet and AI. Ultimately, this may not mean the end of university, but rather a painful evolution. The future likely holds more hybrid, personalized, and lifelong learning pathways. The central question becomes: in a world changing faster than any curriculum, how do we best learn?

marsbit1h ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

The commercialization of generative AI is facing a critical inflection point as a potential price war looms. According to The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is considering a significant cut to its token fees to compete with rival Anthropic, signaling a shift from a growth-at-all-costs model focused on token consumption. This move comes as both companies, reportedly losing billions on compute, prepare for IPOs, and as enterprise customers face "bill shock" from switching to usage-based token billing. Reports indicate poor ROI, with one analysis finding only 18 cents of every dollar spent on AI tokens generates user-facing value. The industry's initial phases—from flat-rate subscriptions to aggressive subsidies—have given way to a reckoning with real costs. Analysts debate the future: some predict a bifurcation between premium, high-cost models for complex tasks and cheaper alternatives for routine work, while others believe overall spending will still rise as agentic AI increases tokens per task. Notably, Chinese model DeepSeek's low-cost API is gaining traction with U.S. enterprises, adding competitive pressure. The core challenge is redefining value beyond token volume ("tokenmaxxing") toward measurable productivity ("valuemaxxing"), as the entire AI value chain, from cloud providers to chipmakers, feels the ripple effects of unsustainable pricing.

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片