ZachXBT Links US Seized Crypto Theft to Contractor CEO’s Son

TheNewsCryptoPublished on 2026-01-26Last updated on 2026-01-26

Abstract

Blockchain investigator ZachXBT has alleged that the individual responsible for stealing millions of dollars in cryptocurrency from U.S. government-controlled wallets is John Daghita, the son of Dean Daghita, CEO of Command Services and Support (CMDSS). The company was contracted by the U.S. Marshals Service to manage seized digital assets. ZachXBT linked online persona “Lick” to the theft, tracing transactions back to a government wallet tied to the 2016 Bitfinex hack. Approximately $23 million was consolidated into a single wallet during the incident. CMDSS has not commented, and no criminal charges have been filed.

ZachXBT, a blockchain investigator, has claimed that the person accountable for a multimillion-dollar robbery of cryptocurrency from US government-curbed wallets is the son of the CEO of a company contracted to protect captured digital assets.

ZachXBT posted his detailed findings, claiming that a body known online as “Lick”, recognised as John Daghita, drained tens of millions of dollars in crypto from wallets associated with the US government.

He further claimed that Daghita is the son of Dean Daghita, president and CEO of Command Services and Support (CMDSS), a firm contracted by the US Marshals Service to manage some captured cryptocurrencies.

Public records reveal that CMDSS, based in Haymarket, Virginia, was awarded a contract in October 2024 to help the Marshals Service with the custody and disposal of so-called “Class 2-4” digital assets.

These comprise tokens that aren’t backed by prominent centralised exchanges and mostly need bespoke handling. The claim hasn’t been tested in court, and no criminal charges have been publicised.

At the time of writing, CMDSS had not officially commented on the matter. The claims of ZachXBT were highlighted with the publication of January 23, which associated the same online persona with over $90 million in suspected illegal crypto activity.

The Investigation

The investigation followed the trail back to a U.S. government wallet linked with assets captured from the 2016 Bitfinex hack. The inquiry gained traction after a listed dispute in a Telegram group chat between “Lick” and another individual.

At the time of exchange, “Lick” screen-shared an Exodus wallet showing a Tron address holding around $2.3 million after a live transfer of around $6.7 million in Ether. With the conclusion of the session, around $23 million had been united into a single wallet.

After the transactions were traced backward, ZachXBT associated that wallet with an address that got $24.9 million from a US government-controlled wallet in March 2024.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Metaplanet Lifts 2026 Outlook Despite $680M BTC Write-Down

TagsCEOUSAZachXBT

Related Questions

QWho is ZachXBT and what did he claim in his investigation?

AZachXBT is a blockchain investigator who claimed that the person responsible for a multimillion-dollar cryptocurrency theft from US government-curbed wallets is the son of the CEO of Command Services and Support (CMDSS), a company contracted to protect captured digital assets.

QWhat is the online alias and real name of the individual accused of the crypto theft?

AThe individual accused is known online as 'Lick' and is identified as John Daghita.

QWhat is the connection between the accused individual and the company CMDSS?

AJohn Daghita is alleged to be the son of Dean Daghita, who is the president and CEO of Command Services and Support (CMDSS).

QWhat was the value of the suspected illegal crypto activity associated with the online persona 'Lick'?

AThe online persona 'Lick' was associated with over $90 million in suspected illegal crypto activity.

QFrom which infamous hack were the assets in the US government wallet linked to?

AThe assets in the US government wallet were linked to the 2016 Bitfinex hack.

Related Reads

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

Title: Arbitrum Poses as Hacker to Recover Stolen Funds from KelpDAO Last week, KelpDAO suffered a hack resulting in nearly $300 million in losses, marking the largest DeFi security incident this year. Approximately 30,765 ETH (worth over $70 million) remained on an Arbitrum address controlled by the attacker. In an unprecedented move, Arbitrum’s Security Council utilized its emergency authority to upgrade the Inbox bridge contract, adding a function that allowed them to impersonate the hacker’s address and initiate a transfer without access to its private key. The council’s action, approved by 9 of its 12 members, moved the stolen ETH to a frozen address in a single transaction before reverting the contract to its original state. The operation was coordinated with law enforcement, which attributed the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. Community reactions are divided: some praise the recovery of funds, while others question the centralization of power, as the council can upgrade core contracts without governance votes. However, such emergency mechanisms are common among major L2s. Despite the partial recovery, over $292 million was stolen in total, with more than $100 million in bad debt on Aave and remaining funds scattered across other chains. The incident highlights escalating security challenges in DeFi, with state-sponsored hackers employing advanced tactics and L2s responding with elevated countermeasures.

marsbit7m ago

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

marsbit7m ago

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbit1h ago

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片