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

ambcryptoОпубліковано о 2026-04-10Востаннє оновлено о 2026-04-10

Анотація

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.

Трендові криптовалюти

Пов'язані питання

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.

Пов'язані матеріали

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

This article, "From Companies to DAOs: How DUNA Could Become the Next Organizational Form," traces the 500-year evolution of business collaboration. It begins with medieval structures like the *commenda* and Florentine *compagnia*, which exposed partners to personal risk. The modern corporation, exemplified by the Dutch East India Company (VOC), was a revolutionary leap, enabling large-scale, capital-intensive ventures by offering limited liability and reducing coordination costs. However, corporations introduced new challenges like principal-agent problems and bureaucratic overhead. The piece argues that software and internet-native protocols are now reducing these traditional overheads. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) emerged as a new model for coordination without centralized management. Yet, DAOs face a significant legal vacuum: they lack legal recognition, leaving members exposed to unlimited personal liability, and their tokens are vulnerable to being classified as securities under unclear regulations (e.g., the Howey Test). This has forced projects into suboptimal workarounds like offshore foundations. The article identifies the Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) as a potential solution. Recently legalized in states like Wyoming, the DUNA provides a legal wrapper for decentralized networks. It grants key protections—legal personality, limited liability, and perpetual existence—to a group without imposing a traditional hierarchical management structure. This allows token-holder communities to govern, hold assets, and contract as a single legal entity, aligning with their decentralized nature. While DUNA doesn't solve all governance challenges or magically resolve securities law questions, it represents a crucial step. It fills the legal recognition gap, offering a native legal form for internet-scale, decentralized collaboration and extending the separation of personal risk from organizational venture into a new domain.

marsbit22 хв тому

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

marsbit22 хв тому

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

The 2026 Mid-Year Report on On-Chain RWA highlights a significant growth in tokenized stock market capitalization, which nearly doubled from $951 million in March to $1.89 billion by July. However, the report reveals a fundamental contradiction in this "layer 2.5" ecosystem: products with the strongest legal foundation (like regulated U.S. infrastructure) lack liquidity and distribution, while freely tradable offshored wrapper products often lack substantive ownership rights. The increase is driven largely by a few products (SECZ, FGRS, STRCx) and platforms (Ondo, xStocks, Securitize collectively hold over 85% share). While distributed value across networks like Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain has grown, the market remains fragmented. Products referencing the same underlying asset (e.g., Apple stock) are distinct legal liabilities with different intermediaries and jurisdictional rules, offering varying degrees of legal claim. The report cautions that headline numbers are misleading, as they reflect changes in distributed token value—driven by issuance, conversions, and price movements—not pure investor inflows. True "canonical shares" with legal ownership, wide wallet distribution, institutional liquidity, and independent on-chain price discovery do not yet exist at scale. Tokenized treasuries show stronger product-market fit, and ETFs may be easier to scale than single stocks. The core takeaway is a trade-off: legal certainty versus liquidity and composability.

marsbit1 год тому

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

marsbit1 год тому

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: 594 Bitcoin Withdrawn in 25 Minutes

The Coldcard hardware wallet has been compromised, with hackers stealing approximately 594.5 Bitcoin (~$40 million) from 500 addresses in just 25 minutes. The root cause was a critical software bug, undetected for five years, which disabled the device's secure chip for generating true random numbers. This led to the creation of private keys based on predictable data like the processor's serial number, drastically reducing cryptographic security. The attackers exploited this offline by brute-forcing possible seed phrases, finding active addresses on the public ledger, and signing transactions. Initially, Coinkite (Coldcard's maker) claimed only older models were at risk but later admitted all devices running the compromised firmware were vulnerable. CEO Rodolphe Novak (NVK) apologized but ruled out financial compensation for affected users. To secure funds, owners must urgently update their firmware to specific safe versions, generate a completely new seed phrase on the updated device, and transfer all assets to new addresses created with that new seed. While a BIP-39 passphrase can help, it does not replace this migration process. Other Coinkite products like TAPSIGNER were not affected. This incident underscores that even specialized hardware requires rigorous, independent code audits, especially for cryptographic functions. It parallels past failures, like a 2006 OpenSSL bug in Debian, and raises questions about whether automated code analysis can ever fully replace human scrutiny in critical security areas.

cryptonews.ru3 год тому

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: 594 Bitcoin Withdrawn in 25 Minutes

cryptonews.ru3 год тому

Торгівля

Спот

Популярні статті

Як купити DRIFT

Ласкаво просимо до HTX.com! Ми зробили покупку Drift Protocol (DRIFT) простою та зручною. Дотримуйтесь нашої покрокової інструкції, щоб розпочати свою криптовалютну подорож.Крок 1: Створіть обліковий запис на HTXВикористовуйте свою електронну пошту або номер телефону, щоб зареєструвати обліковий запис на HTX безплатно. Пройдіть безпроблемну реєстрацію й отримайте доступ до всіх функцій.ЗареєструватисьКрок 2: Перейдіть до розділу Купити крипту і виберіть спосіб оплатиКредитна/дебетова картка: використовуйте вашу картку Visa або Mastercard, щоб миттєво купити Drift Protocol (DRIFT).Баланс: використовуйте кошти з балансу вашого рахунку HTX для безперешкодної торгівлі.Треті особи: ми додали популярні способи оплати, такі як Google Pay та Apple Pay, щоб підвищити зручність.P2P: Торгуйте безпосередньо з іншими користувачами на HTX.Позабіржова торгівля (OTC): ми пропонуємо індивідуальні послуги та конкурентні обмінні курси для трейдерів.Крок 3: Зберігайте свої Drift Protocol (DRIFT)Після придбання Drift Protocol (DRIFT) збережіть його у своєму обліковому записі на HTX. Крім того, ви можете відправити його в інше місце за допомогою блокчейн-переказу або використовувати його для торгівлі іншими криптовалютами.Крок 4: Торгівля Drift Protocol (DRIFT)Легко торгуйте Drift Protocol (DRIFT) на спотовому ринку HTX. Просто увійдіть до свого облікового запису, виберіть торгову пару, укладайте угоди та спостерігайте за ними в режимі реального часу. Ми пропонуємо зручний досвід як для початківців, так і для досвідчених трейдерів.

346 переглядів усьогоОпубліковано 2024.12.11Оновлено 2026.06.02

Як купити DRIFT

Обговорення

Ласкаво просимо до спільноти HTX. Тут ви можете бути в курсі останніх подій розвитку платформи та отримати доступ до професійної ринкової інформації. Нижче представлені думки користувачів щодо ціни DRIFT (DRIFT).

活动图片