WALLET

Ambire Wallet

Long before cryptocurrencies became synonymous with retail speculation and market cycles, U.S. government researchers were already evaluating distributed systems through a very different lens. Their focus was not on price action or decentralization narratives, but infrastructure resilience, identity assurance, and trust at the national scale. In that quieter domain of space and defense research, certain technologies were assessed for their ability to operate securely within regulated environments—an assessment that now appears strikingly prescient. That context has resurfaced following a recent post by Pumpius, who drew attention to a largely forgotten 2018–2019 U.S. Space and Defense research paper. The document distinguishes between blockchain and distributed ledger technology (DLT) and, in doing so, explicitly classifies Ripple as a trusted, open-permissioned ledger designed for banks, identity systems, and real-world infrastructure. Why the Paper Separates Blockchain From DLT A core contribution of the research lies in its clarification of terminology. The paper explains that blockchain is only one form of DLT, characterized by cryptographically linked blocks arranged in a chronological chain. DLT, however, is a broader architectural category that may not rely on blocks at all. Instead, it focuses on distributed data replication, consensus, and integrity across multiple servers. Sweet Jesus, Mother Mary of Bethlehem! US Space & Defense research paper RIPPLE as a trusted, open-permissioned ledger built for banks, identity, access control & real-world infrastructure. https://t.co/J5jL9Ose20 — Pumpius (@pumpius) December 21, 2025 For the space and defense sectors, this distinction matters. These environments require high throughput, deterministic performance, and strict governance—characteristics that are often incompatible with fully open, permissionless blockchains. As a result, the paper consistently favors DLT as the more adaptable and realistic solution for government and industrial use. Ripple’s Designation as Trusted Infrastructure Within its classification of DLT models, the research identifies Ripple as an example of an open-participation, permissioned ledger. In this structure, the ledger remains publicly accessible, but validation authority is restricted to approved nodes. The paper explicitly describes Ripple as “trusted,” reflecting its suitability for regulated environments where accountability and access control are non-negotiable. We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1 — TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025 The researchers further note that Ripple (XRP) was created for banks and payment networks, enabling direct, real-time asset transfers that reduce cost and complexity while improving transparency. This framing places Ripple firmly outside the realm of retail crypto experimentation and squarely within institutional financial architecture. Identity and Access Management as the Real Adoption Layer Rather than focusing on speculative use cases, the paper emphasizes where DLT adoption actually scales: identity and access management, certification, verification, and regulated settlement. These functions are foundational to national infrastructure, particularly in sectors involving licensing, export control, cybersecurity, and compliance. The research also highlights that transformative technologies integrate gradually. Like electricity or the TCP/IP protocol, DLT must overcome regulatory, organizational, and political barriers before its full impact is realized—a process measured in decades, not market cycles. XRPL and the Privacy Layer: the Paper Anticipated What the 2018–2019 research could only outline conceptually is now being implemented on the XRP Ledger. XRPL is incorporating zero-knowledge credentials , selective disclosure mechanisms, and verifiable identity frameworks that enable compliance without exposing lots of data. These developments directly address the identity and access challenges identified in the defense paper. As privacy-focused protocols like DNA Protocol progress on the XRP Ledger (XRPL), the ledger is evolving into a privacy-preserving national infrastructure rather than consumer-facing crypto rails. The significance of the research paper is not historical curiosity. It reveals that Ripple’s architecture was evaluated, categorized, and effectively validated for state-grade use years ago. Far from aging out, the paper has aged into relevance—underscoring that XRP Ledger is not pivoting toward institutional adoption, but fulfilling a blueprint written well ahead of its time. Disclaimer : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses. Follow us on Twitter , Facebook , Telegram , and Google News The post U.S Space & Defense Research Paper: Ripple (XRP) Is Built for Banks appeared first on Times Tabloid .

To complement the efforts of Ripple Labs in the XRP Ledger development, innovators are now working on a lending system.

The number of non-empty wallets on the XRP Ledger has recorded a consistent upward trend, as market enthusiasts appear to be loading up XRP. XRP has reduced by 15% over the past month, but new whales seem to be raking up the token. Visit Website

Stellar Rippler (@StellarNews007), an XRP-focused account on X, published a post suggesting that Pumpius (@pumpius), a major XRP enthusiast, sold approximately 6.2 million XRP. Stellar Rippler backed this bold assertion with on-chain data showing transactions from a wallet allegedly linked to Pumpius. The Claim and the Evidence Presented According to Stellar Rippler, public XRPL data suggest a balance reduction of roughly 6.2 million XRP around November 12, 2025. The post included an image displaying recent transactions tied to the inferred address. One entry shows a validated payment with a change of -6.2 million XRP. Two earlier entries show incoming payments of +222.8k XRP and +625.7k XRP. Stellar Rippler emphasized that the wallet connection to Pumpius is inferred. The size of the transaction also stood out. Stellar Rippler described the move as eyebrow-raising due to the figure involved and the individual believed to be connected to it. Stellar Rippler also questioned why a move of that size would occur at that moment if the inference proved accurate. Many advocates have advised against selling XRP , and this decision raised speculation on Pumpius’ motives. BREAKING: One Of The Most Influential XRP Advocate @Pumpius DUMPED ~6.2 MILLION XRP? Based on public XRPL balance changes (not a confirmed wallet, just inference from wallet balance), it appears that around 6.2M XRP may have been sold on Nov 12, 2025. What makes this… https://t.co/LmzwSxUqeT pic.twitter.com/dudY5gjRdR — Stellar Rippler (@StellarNews007) December 16, 2025 Focus on Pumpius and Public Statements Pumpius has a reputation as a long-term and outspoken supporter of XRP . Stellar Rippler referenced that public posture. The post noted that Pumpius has consistently promoted patience and conviction within the XRP community. An image attached to the post also showed a prior statement from Pumpius dated September 9. In that post, Pumpius revealed that his holdings had risen above $18.5 million. Stellar Rippler used this image to contextualize the scale of holdings discussed and to explain why this sale was unexpected. We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1 — TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025 The post questioned why such a move would happen there and why that size mattered. This move also coincided with bearish XRP predictions , and Stellar Rippler asked what knowledge might have influenced Pumpius’ timing. What Does this Mean for XRP? Stellar Rippler clearly labeled the post as a question, stating, “Not an accusation, a question.” He also noted that large XRP promoters do not make moves like this without a reason, and this sale has prompted speculation of a potential bearish test . As it stands, the situation rests on inference and public ledger data. No confirmation exists that the wallet belongs to Pumpius or that a sale occurred. Stellar Rippler’s post placed those uncertainties front and center while highlighting why the data has drawn attention within the XRP community. Disclaimer : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses. Follow us on X , Facebook , Telegram , and Google News The post One Of The Most Influential XRP Advocates Dumps 6.2 Million XRP appeared first on Times Tabloid .

In an interesting development, leading XRPL project Doppler Finance has entered into a strategic partnership with SBI Ripple Asia. Per a statement released today, the collaboration will focus on developing institutional-grade XRP yield products and advancing the tokenization of real-world assets (RWAs) on the XRP Ledger (XRPL). Visit Website

Ripple offered one of the fastest settlement chains, known as the XRP Ledger or XRPL. The ledger aims to compete for scalability and liquidity with Ethereum’s L2 ecosystem, based on settlement speed and the low cost of transactions. Both solutions offer a similar range of transactions per second, but XRPL has a native finality process, instead of relying on Ethereum. We will cover more details on the XRP Ledger vs Ethereum Layer 2s, with strengths and weaknesses for the different types of chains. Why settlement speed matters Payments vs smart contracts vs rollup settlement Settlement speed, also known as finality, is a key component that may define a network’s use cases. XRPL settles transactions to finality in 3-5 seconds, which is standard for most chains. There is no preview period or waiting time. When making an Ethereum L2 rollups comparison, all chains have a different time to finality. Those L2 still need to wait for an Ethereum block to make a permanent, secured record. Payments in crypto can be relatively simple, but smart contract activity creates complexity. Without instant settlement, there are fears of delays or potential exploits. Rollups also have a relatively long time until final settlement, creating delays in app usage. Rollups can take minutes or even hours until locking in their finality. Growing institutional interest in fast finality Institutional finance that uses blockchains is showing concerns about finality. Earlier crypto stages caused days-long delays to ensure transactions are irreversible, for instance, by waiting for multiple node confirmations. The settlement and finality process can take minutes and cause significant delays in trading and app usage. Fast finality aims to achieve a process that is fair and tamper-proof, but also fast. The biggest challenge is to achieve reliable, fast node consensus without sacrificing security. Use cases that require instant settlement Instant settlement can improve the quality of apps using some form of on-chain payment. Those include direct remittances, trading and on-chain swaps, treasury management, and more. Apps with an on-chain component aim to achieve the speeds that regular users expect from their fintech tools, hence the need for fast settlement and no waiting period until finality. Users may also want to use their funds quickly, instead of seeing their transaction locked in a transitory state until finality is achieved. XRPL overview — A purpose-built settlement layer XRPL is a dedicated settlement layer for both native transactions and connections to other chains. Transactions are validated by a network of permissionless, voluntarily run nodes, which achieve consensus via Unique Node Lists, which contain already vetted validator nodes. Consensus model Ripple built XRPL to have a unique consensus model, which combines a mix of permissionless validators and vetted nodes. Transactions are finalized with the help of Unique Node Lists, where existing nodes are vetted and gain a reputation for reliability. The network thus has a layer of trust and relies on the list mechanism to exclude bad actors. 3–5 second finality XRPL achieves 3-5 seconds for its finality, based on the confidence in the UNLs. To compare, widely used chains like Arbitrum can reach up to 17 minutes until finality, with 18 minutes for Base. L2 chains usually have a longer time to finality, as they wait to secure their ledger through Ethereum blocks. Since some chains pay for space in those blocks, they post more rarely, stretching the time to finality. Other chains create a workaround with soft and hard finality, but the process is also slower. For XRPL, finality relies on the chain’s own validators and faces no additional delays. Low fees and deterministic settlement The XRPL architecture and validator mix mean the network offers extremely low fees. The usual fee is less than $0.00001. The network has taken into consideration demand from institutions, which prefer fast final settlement, not subject to reversal. Some of the common chains rely on probabilistic settlement, where the finality is achieved via multiple confirmations. XRPL uses deterministic settlement, meaning the state of the transaction is not even hypothetically reversible once it is finalized. Why XRPL doesn’t rely on miners/validators for block production XRPL has abandoned mining in a bid to build a cheaper, yet secure network. The chain also does not use validators, which can also skew the incentive ecosystem or become overly influential. Instead, the chain uses nodes, which are vetted into Unique Node Lists. XRPL also aims to make the network more predictable, which would be impossible with the presence of overly influential miners or validators. XRPL’s core design: payments + liquidity layers XRPL is not only used to settle payments, but also provides reserves of liquidity. The chain not only offers simple settlement, but also aims to offer specific tasks that closely track the practices of traditional finance. XRPL can handle simple XRP transfers, in addition to cross-currency payments, by connecting senders and receivers through orders. Transactions on XRPL can be complex, combining multiple paths and liquidity sources to deliver the desired end balance. Built-in features: DEX, IOUs, escrow The potential for complex transactions means XRPL contains some features that are only possible as separate apps on other chains. XRPL has a built-in DEX for swaps between various assets. The chain can carry tokenized IOUs between two counterparties. Currently, XRPL is holding a vote on launching an escrow service. The XRPL decentralized ledger is thus one of the oldest platforms for built-in blockchain swaps, even before the creation of the first decentralized exchanges with automated liquidity. Ethereum Layer 2s overview — scaling via rollups Ethereum has successfully scaled through L2 chains, of which the usage of rollups is the most common type of chain. L2 chains perform a part of their computation offline, later recording the state of the ledger on Ethereum. Optimistic Rollups Optimistic rollups use a process where they accept all proposed transactions as valid (optimistic) and rely on fraud proofs, where network participants can challenge the validity of transactions before they reach finality. Usually, those networks have a 7-day challenge window. While transactions are executed instantly, their settlement is delayed for verification and is open to challenges. zk-Rollups Zero-knowledge, or ZK rollups, make a different assumption about the validity of transactions. All transactions are processed entirely off-chain, but then for each block, a zero-knowledge proof is created for the batch of transactions in that block. The ZK-Rollup chain then posts the proof with minimal additional data to the main network. The ZK-Rollup scaling solution offers more reliable mathematical proofs and can achieve faster finality safely. However, it relies on more computation from nodes to produce the validity proof after checking transactions. Base Base is one of the most widely used Optimistic Rollup networks, launched by Coinbase. The network relies on speed, with fast transaction processing, but a finality time of 13 to 19 minutes. The goal of Base is to offer compliant on-chain activity with extremely low fees. Base is one of the networks that spends the most fees for posting its state on Ethereum when transactions achieve finality. Shared themes L2 chains are all capable of near-instant transaction processing, with no delays for confirmations. However, each L2 chooses an interval at which to post the state of its ledger and include it in an Ethereum block. If too many L2 post their state, the fees to post increase. There are two ways to post the latest state on Ethereum: calldata or blobs. Both methods require more gas if a larger number of L2 decide to post. In late 2025, Ethereum increased the blobs per block from 6 to 10, giving more leeway to L2 chains to post their ledger without additional fees. Ethereum updates have decreased posting fees from hundreds of thousands of dollars to a few thousand dollars per day, even for regular blob usage, as in the case of Base. Settlement speed comparison Throughput (TPS) Network Approx. TPS Notes XRP Ledger 1,500+ Dedicated to payments Arbitrum 2,000+ High real-world throughput Optimism ~1,000 Depends on sequencer zkSync / Starknet ~2,000+ Scaling rapidly Base ~1,000 Coinbase-operated Finality Network Finality Time Notes XRPL 3–5 seconds True finality, deterministic Arbitrum / Optimism 7 days (canonical), ~2 seconds (soft) Fraud proof window Zk-Rollups 2–15 minutes Depends on proof submission Ethereum L1 ~12 minutes Rollup finality depends on this Why L2 finality ≠ instant L2 chains have two tiers of finality, one that is local for the network and one when the transaction state is posted on Ethereum. Finality may vary between networks, with up to seven days for Optimistic Rollups and 30 minutes to a few hours for ZK-Rollups. XRPL is different in that it has true network finality based on the work of nodes, with no need for soft consensus and additional finality mechanisms. The finality is deterministic and ensured by the selected and vetted nodes, who have no incentives to collude or change the ledger. Architecture differences that impact speed Different chains have constraints in handling transactions, which may be due to several sources of delay. Those include validator consensus, block time, and time to finality. We will look over the main differences in network architecture, which affect overall speed. XRPL XRPL is a single-layered distributed ledger that has built-in fast consensus. There are no delays to XRPL blockchain settlement time, at least when it comes to simple payments. However, XRPL is not optimized for smart contracts, which may add layers of complexity. Ethereum L2s Ethereum-based L2s introduce a two-tier architecture, where the L2 ledger is finalized on L1, becoming a part of the record in an Ethereum block. One transaction still must go through validators to be approved, and then wait to be finalized in an Ethereum block. L2 chains often start with a sequencer, which speeds up transaction execution, but delays finality for disputes. Validator networks are fair and decentralized, but they add delays when reaching consensus between nodes. Those networks work well for apps, but are too slow for instant payments. Payments use case: who wins? XRPL is specifically built for cross-border reliable payments, remittances, and liquidity routing. The chain carries relatively predictable types of transfers. L2s can perform many functions – decentralized finance, NFTs , and token trading. L2s are programmable, but tend to grow into a large and complex ecosystem. XRPL wins out on speed, the low cost of whitelisted nodes, and on deterministic finality based on approved validators, with no need for trustless coordination. Real-world adoption comparison XRPL adoption XRPL has achieved multiple partnerships and institutional settlement tests. The network has actively attempted to drive adoption through partnerships with companies like Azimo and Tanglo. The partnerships offer access to the On-Demand Liquidity system (ODL), creating corridors for remittances to specific destinations. Azimo, for instance, uses an ODL payment corridor to process remittances to the Philippines. XRPL has also tested central bank digital currencies. The network is also open to regular users and can perform swaps as a DEX. Ethereum L2s adoption L2s took off quickly, as some were incentivized through token airdrops. Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, and a few other networks took over 13% of Ethereum-based economic activity, especially low-cost DEX trading. Various chains had specific use cases, such as NFTs, lending, DEX trading , or token transfers. Starknet and zkSync added to the mix of L2 with their own set of apps. L2 went through a period of turbulence, but returned in 2025 as a staple in the crypto space, handling more traffic and activities. Key advantages of XRPL Ripple’s XRP Ledger, or XRPL, has a short processing time for transactions. Deterministic finality means transactions always take 3-5 seconds, with no need to extend the time to assure confirmations or consensus. As a result, XRPL has predictably low fees, with no network congestion. Since XRPL carries only transactions, the chain does not suffer from sudden traffic coming from smart contracts. Ripple’s distributed ledger has operated for a decade, with a proven track record and no outages. XRPL has taken some features from foreign exchange markets, ensuring sufficient liquidity to process payments and transfer value. XRPL has on-demand liquidity and is capable of transferring value with seamless transactions in different currencies. In this way, XRPL mimics traditional FX exchanges, though with faster on-chain settlement. Key advantages of Ethereum Layer 2s The chief advantage of L2s is the overwhelming number of developers building on Ethereum, a total of over 5,300 known creators on the EVM stack. This led to a massive dApp and decentralized finance ecosystem. The chains combined incentives, airdrops, and community building with earning opportunities. The flexibility of smart contracts introduced financial innovation into the ecosystem. Additionally, all protocols were composable with Ethereum, which increased liquidity, token and stablecoin inflows, and the opportunities for lending and settlement across chains. L2 also allows for application-specific chains, also known as L3, with modular tasks on top of the L2 infrastructure. Challenges both networks face XRPL challenges XRPL has limited potential to launch smart contracts. One of the proposed solutions is XRPL Hooks , which allows a series of instructions to be filled before setting up a transaction on the main ledger. This means the smart contract logic and processing happen off-chain. Already established networks are also competing with XRPL for payments. Solana turned into a stablecoin leader, and Stellar directly competes with XRPL with an open-source ledger. Liquidity is also scarce, as XRPL planned to use XRP tokens and liquidity from institutions to perform payments. However, the lack of user deposits and a decentralized money market meant XRPL lagged behind the DeFi boom. L2 challenges L2 chains have to make a tradeoff between scalability and speed. With over 100 chains, some are still struggling to become decentralized and remove their sequencer server. While there are tools to circumvent a sequencer, most L2 chains still go through a centrally approved status of their distributed ledger. Finality also depends on Ethereum blocks and on posting the latest state of the ledger. The other problem with L2 is the vast ecosystem, which is complex and confusing, requiring complex bridging and additional fees. This leads to fragmented liquidity, leaving some L2 with insufficient funds, while others remain the central hubs for trading and DeFi . Which network will lead in settlement speed by 2026? XRPL will remain a fast platform for transactions, with confirmed deterministic near-instant settlement. ZK-rollups may speed up their settlement to a few minutes and narrow the gap. L2 speeds will remain ideal for smart contract execution, but will retain their delayed finality and remain dependent on Ethereum blocks. For some tasks, hybrid models may emerge, combining XRPL transactions with sidechains. L2s may also add new tools for computation and faster verification. The preference for chains and platforms will still take into account the specific communities and required tasks.

Crypto pundit Chain Cartel has raised several key points following SWIFT’s latest comment on its move to adopt blockchain technology. The pundit claimed that Ripple’s XRPL network best suits what SWIFT is trying to achieve and suggested that the two firms collaborate. Pundit Points To Ripple’s XRPL After SWIFT’s Announcement In an X post , Chain Cartel stated that SWIFT admitted they are building Ripple’s XRPL network, but did not explicitly say so in their announcement. The pundit was referring to an X post from SWIFT highlighting their earlier announcement to add a blockchain-based ledger to their infrastructure. The pundit explained that SWIFT’s language in the X post suggests that they want to build something like Ripple’s XRPL. He declared that it is not Bitcoin, Ethereum, or any generic blockchain experiment but precisely what Ripple has been building for a decade. Chain Cartel noted that Ripple’s model has always been a neutral settlement layer, real-time atomic finality, shared ledger visibility for institutions, interoperability with legacy rails, and liquidity-first design. Chain Cartel then alluded to SWIFT’s statement about its plans to build a blockchain-based ledger to be included in its payment infrastructure and provide a single source of truth, enabling instant, 24/7 cross-border payments. He declared that this is Ripple’s blueprints with the XRPL , as the crypto firm uses the network for its payment services. In line with this, the pundit remarked that SWIFT doesn’t replace rails, but instead coordinates them, and that Ripple doesn’t replace banks , but instead connects them. He added that SWIFT is acknowledging that the future payment stack requires a ledger layer, not just messaging, and that the only model already battle-tested at scale is Ripple’s XRPL. However, it is worth mentioning that SWIFT doesn’t plan to integrate Ripple’s Ledger. Instead, it is building this blockchain-based ledger in partnership with Consensys and Chainlink. As such, although SWIFT may plan to build a network similar to Ripple’s XRPL, it intends to do so without assistance from the crypto firm. Ripple Looking To Expand Its Payment Service Ripple is looking to expand its payment service, as it recently announced plans to begin testing its RLUSD stablecoin on Ethereum layer-2 networks Base, Ink, Optimism, and Unichain. The move comes just days after the OCC granted Ripple a conditional approval to become a bank, which is also a major boost for the firm’s payment service. Ripple plans to expand its RLUSD stablecoin beyond the Ethereum and XRPL networks to these layer-2 networks through its partnership with Wormhole. The firm noted that the future of crypto is multichain, which is why it is adopting this strategy. This move gives Ripple’s clients greater options when using the RLUSD stablecoin, and it could also attract new users to the stablecoin, which is currently one of the fastest-growing stablecoins.

Reports have emerged that Ronald Spektor, a New York-based man, has finally been picked up by the police, for allegedly defrauding users of $6.5 million by impersonating a Coinbase customer service representative. At the time, Zach published a detailed thread that linked Spektor to a $6.5 million theft, which targeted a single victim in October 2024. The scam involved spoofing, which allowed the scammer to appear as Coinbase support and coerce the victim into using a phishing site, which drained their account. What role did ZachXBT play in the arrest? The famous crypto sleuth played a big role in the investigation after Zach was petitioned by a desperate victim who had lost his life savings to a Coinbase customer care scam in November 2024. I am pleased to share that the threat actor ‘Ronald Spektor’ (Ron) was recently arrested in New York. In November 2024 I published my investigation detailing his involvement in a $6M Coinbase support impersonation scam and other thefts after a victim contacted me for… pic.twitter.com/ZitEV4nrIS — ZachXBT (@zachxbt) December 15, 2025 Zach was meticulous in his investigation, tracing the funds through convoluted routes from exchanges to wallets, then ultimately tying it all to Spektor, with his email, New York IP addresses, and other personal details revealed. One of the things that gave him away was his inability to keep quiet because part of the evidence used to identify him included him flexing his Ledger Live via Discord screen share, which showed large deposits not long after the theft occurred. Unfortunately, the victim allegedly deleted their X account before the conclusion of the investigation, acting on the counsel of a friend. At the time, Zach implied there were accomplices, as only about half of the stolen finds ended up with Spektor. That was in 2024. Not much was heard after that until December 15, 2025, when Zach announced Spektor’s arrest, attributing the operation’s success to his earlier investigation. It is unknown if the funds have been recovered or if the victim has a chance of getting them back. Spektor’s accomplices, if they exist, are still in the wind. Coinbase has been at the center of similar scams The scam Spektor orchestrated was not a one-off occurrence or something he got away with by luck. Coinbase and its users have been unfortunate targets of scams and exploits ranging from customer care impersonation to large-scale exploits. The reason is not far-fetched. The platform is the largest and most popular U.S.-based crypto exchange, boasting millions of users who hold significant assets that attract scammers, especially in bull runs when balances tend to be on the fatter side. Cryptopolitan has reported claims from sleuths like ZachXBT, who estimate that more than $65 million was lost in Coinbase scams between December 2024 and January 2025. Between January 2025 and March, the value was about $46 million, and annually, the estimates run to a potential $300-400 million via these methods. Those are huge numbers, but they are still considered underestimates, as they don’t include unreported cases or those only shared by the police or via support tickets. Sleuths like ZachXBT have criticized Coinbase for not doing enough to protect its users, but the exchange has repeatedly warned its users against trusting unsolicited phone calls or random demands for critical information like passwords, seed phrases, or private keys. Coinbase has also reportedly implemented several robust measures to combat fraud effectively, including advanced fraud detection systems that proactively identify and block potential scams. It also offers an extensive security guide that outlines best practices and common warning signs of scams. While rare, it has also demonstrated its commitment to customer safety by reimbursing clients affected by documented fraud cases. Despite those extensive precautions, individual user vigilance remains crucial as the scams have not let up. Fortunately, news like the arrest of Spektor highlights an improvement and shows that crypto scams are not completely immune from investigation and law enforcement action. Join Bybit now and claim a $50 bonus in minutes

The deal achieved T+0 settlement on a permissioned distributed ledger rather than a public blockchain, reflecting a growing regional shift toward regulated digital bond infrastructure.