Kraken And Legion Partner To Scale Onchain Fundraising

TheCryptoTimesОпубліковано о 2025-09-18Востаннє оновлено о 2025-09-18

Crypto exchange Kraken has formed a strategic partnership with fundraising platform Legion, bringing compliant on-chain token sales to over 15 million users worldwide. The deal, which combines Legion’s fundraising technology with Kraken’s newly launched Kraken Launch platform,aims to modernize digital asset fundraising for a global audience.

According to a company blog post, the partnership aims to set a new standard for compliant and transparent token sales. The new Kraken Launch platform will provide a seamless gateway for retail investors to participate in “vetted token sales” and initial coin offerings (ICOs) in the crypto, AI, and Web3 sectors.

In a recent statement, Matt O’Connor, co-founder of Legion, said, “Crypto gave us the tools to rebuild capital markets from first principles. Kraken gives us the ← reach to make it count. The next Figma or Reddit won’t IPO. It will launch to its community onchain. We’re building the infrastructure to make sure it’s possible.”

By plugging Legion’s platform straight into Kraken Launch, millions of users get a front-row seat to vetted token sales in crypto, AI, and the next wave of digital disruption.

For founders, the deal expands distribution 100-fold, providing access to Kraken’s global user base, guaranteed tier-1 listings, and full-stack support from tokenomics to go-to-market campaigns. Kraken’s seed investment in Legion earlier this year — alongside VanEck and Brevan Howard — has now evolved into a full strategic alliance.

Setting stage for regulated token sales

The partnership arrives as regulators in the U.S. and Europe roll out clearer rules for digital assets. The SEC’s Project Crypto initiative and the EU’s MiCA framework are carving pathways for compliant offerings, creating fertile ground for tokenized fundraising. Against this backdrop, Kraken and Legion are positioning themselves as a bridge between regulation and innovation, promising investors early access to high-quality deals once reserved for insiders.

Token sales will follow a two-phase structure, starting with pre-sale allocations for users holding Legion Scores, then opening to all through first-come, first-serve rounds on both platforms. Legion’s scoring system will soon integrate Kraken’s trading data to build a unified investor reputation graph, while instant tier-1 liquidity on Kraken will support each token launch. 

Together, Legion’s onchain infrastructure and Kraken’s global reach aim to redefine digital fundraising, offering investors curated opportunities and founders investment bank–style services rebuilt for a tokenized economy.

Also read: Kraken Partners with Circle to Boost Stablecoin Access


Mobile Only Image

Пов'язані матеріали

The Danger of Old Bookmarks: How an Expired Tornado Cash Domain Cost a User 1,000 ETH

A user lost over 1,010 ETH (worth millions) due to a phishing attack via an expired official domain of the Tornado Cash protocol. As reported on August 20, 2026, the domain `tornado.cash` was not renewed by the original developers amid U.S. OFAC sanctions and was subsequently registered by malicious actors. They deployed a fake frontend mimicking the legitimate Tornado Cash interface. Through this site, the attackers gained access to the user's deposit notes—the data required to withdraw funds from the protocol's pools—and drained the ETH within 12 hours. On-chain data shows the stolen funds (e.g., wallet 0xd8B356...) were withdrawn from Tornado Cash pools. However, on-chain analyst Specter cast doubt on the victim's story. He suggested the individual might be involved in illicit activity, noting that a large sum of BTC was received from a coin-mixing service (Whirlpool) and converted to ETH before being sent to the fake Tornado Cash site. The victim's explanation of urgently moving funds due to a compromised hardware wallet was questioned, as the fund trail indicated deliberate obfuscation. Specter speculated this might be a conflict between malicious actors rather than a simple phishing case. The incident highlights the danger of expired domains for major protocols, where old bookmarks can lead to compromised sites. WHOIS records show the domain was registered in March 2025. Broader analysis notes that in 2025, over $1.8 billion was lost to scams and exploits, largely through social engineering like phishing via familiar but hijacked links. This case underscores the persistent risk when a domain's legal status changes but user trust and search engine reputation remain.

cryptonews.ru40 хв тому

The Danger of Old Bookmarks: How an Expired Tornado Cash Domain Cost a User 1,000 ETH

cryptonews.ru40 хв тому

You'll Be Surprised How Much WeChat's Architecture Differs from Telegram's

An article compares the core architectural philosophies of WeChat and Telegram, highlighting fundamental differences in data storage, monetization, and developer ecosystems. **Data Storage:** Telegram offers unlimited, synchronized cloud storage for seamless access across all devices. In contrast, WeChat stores chat history locally on each device, requiring a manual migration process for transfer and tethering desktop sessions to an active smartphone. **Features & Ecosystem:** Telegram's open Bot API allows for easy, free bot creation, while WeChat's massive ecosystem of over 4.8 million "mini-programs" operates within a closed, curated, and more regulated platform. Commenting also differs: Telegram uses integrated discussion threads for channels, whereas WeChat relies on pre-moderated comments for official accounts and separate chats for interaction. **File Sharing & Payments:** Telegram supports large file transfers (up to 4GB for Premium), while WeChat limits most files to 200MB. A key divergence is in payments: WeChat Pay is deeply integrated into daily life and commerce in China, whereas Telegram lacks a comparable built-in fiat payment system, focusing instead on third-party bots and crypto. **Analysis:** The comparison reveals two distinct models: WeChat is a tightly integrated, closed ecosystem deeply embedded in the real economy, while Telegram prioritizes open protocols, flexible data handling, and low barriers for developers. An added perspective notes that WeChat's fusion of messaging and payments in a single interface without end-to-end encryption for chats potentially broadens the attack surface, raising security questions as more functions converge.

cryptonews.ru6 год тому

You'll Be Surprised How Much WeChat's Architecture Differs from Telegram's

cryptonews.ru6 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片