Polymarket tightens rules on insider trading and manipulation across DeFi, U.S. platforms

ambcryptoОпубликовано 2026-03-23Обновлено 2026-03-23

Polymarket has introduced updated market integrity rules across its DeFi platform and CFTC-regulated U.S. exchange. It tightens restrictions on insider trading and market manipulation as the prediction market continues to scale.

The changes, announced on 23 March, update the platform’s Terms of Use and U.S. rulebook. It is also launching new market integrity pages outlining enforcement mechanisms and reporting processes.

Polymarket sets clearer rules on insider trading

The updated framework defines three specific categories of prohibited insider trading activity.

Users are barred from trading on stolen confidential information, including non-public data that could influence the outcome of an event.

The rules also prohibit trading on illegally obtained tips, where users knowingly act on information shared in breach of trust or confidentiality.

Additionally, Polymarket bans trading by individuals who hold positions of influence over an outcome, such as those directly involved in events tied to prediction markets.

The company said the changes are designed to bring greater clarity to participants and reinforce expectations across both platforms.

Expanded crackdown on manipulation tactics

Beyond insider trading, the updated rules explicitly prohibit a range of manipulative behaviors.

These include spoofing and wash trading, front-running and self-dealing, fictitious transactions, and broader attempts to disrupt orderly market activity.

The framework also covers information misuse and any effort to influence contract outcomes artificially.

Multi-layered surveillance system introduced

Polymarket outlined separate enforcement approaches for its DeFi platform and its U.S. exchange.

On the DeFi side, the platform relies on blockchain transparency, with all trades recorded on the Polygon network and publicly accessible. Third-party surveillance tools and internal monitoring systems complement this.

If suspicious activity is detected, enforcement actions may include wallet bans, internal investigations, or referrals to law enforcement.

For its U.S. exchange, Polymarket said it operates a more structured compliance system, including real-time monitoring via a control desk and partnerships with surveillance providers.

Also, there is oversight through a Regulatory Services Agreement with the National Futures Association [NFA].

Violations on the U.S. platform may result in suspensions, financial penalties, or regulatory referrals.

Scrutiny grows over prediction market activity

The rule update follows earlier scrutiny of trading activity on the platform.

Early in the month, AMBCrypto reported a cluster of linked wallets that collectively earned over $1 million from bets predicting U.S. and Israeli military strikes involving Iran.

The timing of those trades raised questions about whether participants may have acted on non-public or privileged information.

While no formal wrongdoing was established, the findings added to broader concerns about insider trading risks in decentralized prediction markets.


Final Summary

  • Polymarket has tightened rules on insider trading and manipulation, introducing clearer definitions and stronger enforcement mechanisms.
  • The update follows earlier scrutiny of suspicious trading activity, highlighting ongoing integrity challenges in prediction markets.

Похожее

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.

marsbit7 мин. назад

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

marsbit7 мин. назад

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.

marsbit1 ч. назад

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

marsbit1 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片