Unchained - Why the DOJ Doesn’t Want These MEV Exploiters to Get Away With It - Ep. 647

Episode Date: May 17, 2024

In this episode, Evan Zinaman, founder and principal at Trailbreak, delves into the first-of-its-kind case of the Bueno brothers, who face Department of Justice charges for exploiting Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) in a cryptocurrency scheme. Accused of manipulating transaction ordering to create an arbitrage opportunity, the brothers are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud as well as wire fraud itself.  Zinaman explores the broader implications of MEV exploitation, addresses critics who say that the MEV exploiters just got a taste of their own medicine, and the need for block building participants to consider their legal and compliance responsibilities. Show highlights: What the charges against the Bueno brothers are about How block building works on Ethereum and how the relay was manipulated by the Bueno brothers The different types of MEV and which ones are acceptable  Why these charges could be seen as a "vanilla fraud," according to Evan Whether the benefits of MEV outweigh the cons of it The lack of terms of service in the MEV space How the regulators' attention to the space has changed over time Visit our website for breaking news, analysis, op-eds, articles to learn about crypto, and much more: unchainedcrypto.com First Bits + Bips episode: Bits + Bips: Does Macroeconomics Point to a Potential Crypto Supercycle? Thank you to our sponsors! iTrustCapital Polkadot VaultCraft Guest Evan Zinaman, Founder & Principal at Trailbreak Where the Rubber Meets the Road: A MEV-Aware, Functionalist Review of OFAC Risk "on the Base Layer" Links Previous coverage on Unchained of MEV: Why MEV Will Always Be Controversial The Chopping Block: Why the Once-Taboo MEV Is Now a Core Part of Ethereum The Mango Markets Attacker on Whether His 'Trade' Was Ethical or Not The Chopping Block: ‘Code Is Law’ Is ‘Obviously Not How Anything Works Ever’ The Case: Unchained: DOJ Alleges Two Brothers Stole $25 Million From MEV Bots Last Year Research: Blockchain Transaction Ordering as Market Manipulation by Mikolaj et al Learn more:  What Are Sandwich Attacks in Crypto? A Beginner's Guide What Is MEV in Crypto? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I don't think it's as simple as saying all sandwiching is like toxic and, you know, crypto will be better. You know, sandwiching was made illegal by the governments or something. Hi, everyone. Welcome to Unchained, your no-hype resource for all things crypto. I'm your host, Laura Shin, author of The Cryptopians. I started coming crypto nine years ago and as a senior editor of Forbes was the first mainstream reader reporter to cover cryptocurrency full-time. This is the May 17th, 2024 episode of Unchained. Did you know Unchained is much more than a podcast?

Last year, we unveiled a completely redesigned website, enriching your experience for the latest news, insightful analysis, compelling op-eds, and comprehensive learning articles and guides for beginners. Explore all this and more at Unchained Crypto.com. With I trust capital, you can buy and sell crypto in a tax advantage retirement account. Enjoy significant tax advantages, 24-7 access, and and the industry's lowest fees. Pocodod is the original and leading layer zero blockchain with over 2,000 plus developers, and the Pocodot 2.0 upgrade will be a massive accelerator for the ecosystem. Join the community at Pocodot.network slash ecosystem slash community.

Deploy custom crypto strategies and boost your yield with perpetual options on ValtCraft, the universal defy adapter for supercharging your crypto. Learn more on ValtCraft.io. Today's guest is Evan Zineman, founder and principal at Trailbreak. Welcome, Evan. Thanks for having me, Laura. On Wednesday, the Department of Justice incited two brothers, Anton Pereira Bueno, and James Pereira Bueno, in the first case of its kind involving an MEV exploit. Let's first make sure people understand what the alleged crime was and MEV. So can you explain what happened? Sure, yes. So the indictment that came out Wednesday, the 15th, brought a call. couple charges that are most relevant to MUV. Those are the charges of conspiracy to commit

wire fraud as well as an actual charge of wire fraud. There's also charges relating to money laundering, which kind of deal with what the brothers did after they had, you know, conducted this mev exploit, which, you know, there's separate charges with, you know, separate facts, but maybe we'll just focus on the wire fraud and the conspiracy. Okay. So, but explain kind of like what happened. They essentially kind of like tricked some transactions into doing what? Oh, sure, absolutely. So the, you know, just maybe a brief primer on the way that block building works in Ethereum presently. So, you know, contrary to something like a proof of work system like Bitcoin or early Ethereum where miners were responsible for putting blocks together and

also attesting to their validity and putting them on chain and all in a centralized manner. The current way that Ethereum blocks are built is a kind of by committee due to this transaction chain that's broadly known as Proposer Builder separation and is implemented currently through a marketplace developed by flashbods called Mev Boost. And in that marketplace, that Moose marketplace, there are various actors. There are actors called searchers. There are actors called builders, relays, and ultimately the validators at the end of the transaction chain. In this exploit, the relay, which is the actor just before the validator proposer, was, there was elements of the code on which the relay relies and runs.

that was effectively exploited, hacked, similar to any other kind of zero-day exploits and finding ways to manipulate and use code contrary to the developer's intentions. So in this exploit, the relay was manipulated, one of the many relays in the flashbots marketplace was manipulated in order to reveal information about the ordering of certain transactions in a particular block. And the early revelation of that information that usually the relay keeps private until the block is immediately posted to the chain, that revealed information allowed these brothers to see that there was effectively an arbitrage opportunity.

And because they had earlier in their scheme planted what the indictment refers to with a lower transaction in order to entice certain MEV searchers to bundle that lower transaction with transactions of their own to create a potentially lucrative arbitrage opportunity for the searchers. The brothers were able to see that proposed arbitrage opportunity replace their what's called a lower transaction and the indictment with a separate transaction. I know this is a bit complicated, but effectively, what ended up happening was that the victim, the searchers that were exploited here, they purchased something like $25 million of a certain cryptocurrency, and then we're not able to sell it because effectively by manipulating the ordering of the transactions,

revealed by the relay, the brothers were able to allegedly jump in front of the ultimate proposed sell transaction by the victims. So the victims ended up with a bunch of cryptos that they didn't necessarily want. And the liquidity pool that they were hoping to trade into to realize the arbitrage opportunity was drained by the defendants in the case. And ultimately that, ultimately that exploits, that devising of this scheme in order to effectively perpetuate a fraud is what's been charged as both conspiracy to commit wire fraud as well as actual wire fraud. Yeah. And it has echoes of the Avi Eisenberg-Mago Markets case because of the way that they sort of use these ill-liquid crypto tokens as part of their scheme.

and defy. So one thing before we keep chatting is, you know, we've been saying MEV or MEV, but there's different types and there's different subcategories. So why don't we sort of define kind of like the different ones? Because I do believe there's sort of like a spectrum in terms of sort of what's acceptable versus what's not. Yeah, sure. And this is something that I think the industry struggles or, you know, has struggled and probably still struggles to deal with and how to define what MEV is because there are certain, uh, call them programmatic trading strategies that some might call MEV loop into this broader bucket of MED that are actually probably beneficial or even system critical for

you know, Ethereum and another similar blockchain systems. These are, you know, just basic arbitrage and liquidation transactions, which, you know, arbitrage in its most beneficial form keeps prices tightly correlated across different markets, which is good for market efficiency. And liquidations are useful to clear bad debt from liquidity protocols. And these things kind of keep blockchain systems operating smoothly and efficiently. In contrast, there are more predatory actions that are seen as MEV that really just serve to enrich the the MEB divisor, the MEV extractor at the detriment of either a particular

trader or a particular market like a liquidity pool. And, you know, the most maybe paradigmatic example of toxic MEV is known as the sandwich attack. And, you know, effectively what is what the scheme that was devised in the present indictment is kind of a sandwich attack that was, you know, hidden from the market up until they manipulated the relay at the last seconds. And I'm happy to give a brief summation of a sandwich attack, which is, it's called a sandwich attack because the attacker puts a transaction right in front of a targeted transaction right after it. forming a sandwich. The front run transaction artificially, you know, it boosts the directionality of a certain trade before the targeted transaction. So say the targeted transaction was a buy, then the transaction inserted right before would also be a buy, thus inflating the market, giving the targeted transaction a worse fill because the price is high.

higher than they thought it was going to be. And then immediately after that inflation by the front run transaction, the inflation by the, you know, the natural mechanism of the targeted transaction, you have a doubly inflated market. Finally, the last piece of the sandwich is to sell into that artificially inflated market, the tokens that you bought with your front run transaction, you gain a bit of profit from doing that that you wouldn't otherwise because the market. has been inflated in order to allow you to realize that gain.

So that's kind of a prototypical example of a sandwich attack, which is a very classic example of what people call toxic MEP. And that's analogous to what happens here in the indictment. So what's interesting, though, is that people noted that the Department of Justice didn't appear to, you know, it's sort of similar to the, SPF case where even though it happens in this environment, that's high tech and blockchain and crypto, that the core crimes really more are about fraudulent behavior. So, you know, tricking this relay to prematurely release the private transaction information. Someone else pointed out

the fact that they were also running their own validator while also extracting MEV, which I guess typically there's sort of like a separation between those roles. But the last thing I would say is I was pretty surprised and impressed by how savvy and knowledgeable the DOJ is about MEV and the workings of Ethereum. But, you know, my question, I guess, would be just this is probably going to go to trial. And I don't know if you have an opinion on, you know, how that might go. I, you know, I would defer to my friends and colleagues in the space who are actual really I'm a, you know, corporate attorney.

I just happen to read the docs. So I wouldn't go as far as to, you know, forecast what may happen here. But you are right, Laura, that just as with Sam Bankman-Fried and the FDX collapse, this is seemingly a charge of what to be seen as a vanilla fraud. I mean, you can commit fraud with a blockchain. You can commit fraud with a piece of paper. you commit fraud, you know, with carrier pigeons, just a matter of whining to people and abusing the trust relationship that you, that you have with them, right? So it's in that way, this is, it doesn't, it doesn't seem like something that has in and of itself broader implications

for, you know, for crypto architectures, for MEPV as a practice. You know, we talked, you mentioned And earlier that, you know, this has shades of the Ivy Eisenberg case, but it is notable that in the Ivy Eisenberg case, he was charged among other things with market manipulation, where he was, you know, artificially cornering a market on a centralized exchange in order to manipulate an oracle and, and thus, you know, conduct, you know, an attack on the mango market's liquidation models. And here, they didn't seek to charge the brothers with any sort of market manipulation scheme, fraud on the market, these things which are very interesting questions as they pertain to MED more broadly. And there's been some great scholarship exploring how a taste might fall with respect to charges of market manipulation, insider trading. these things that people have thought about with respect to NB and the practice of sandwiching,

but aren't at issue in the present case, haven't been charged by the DOJ here. They really were, you know, they're just pursuing a fraud case that this involves lying to people and, you know, gaining a monetary gain that you would otherwise without those fraudulent. misrepresentations. You know, they didn't charge a market manipulation here. They didn't charge anything under any of kind of the happening statutes, which you see in other kinds of, you know, non-crypto zero-day exploit cases. So it is interesting to note the prosecutorial discretion here in just choosing to pursue a, you know, vanilla wire fraud case that, as you say, could be extracted from the technology being used and just kind of looking at the behavior of

lying and gaining from why. Yeah, so in a moment, we're going to discuss the wider implications of this case, but first a quick word from the sponsors who make the show possible. Deploy custom crypto strategies and boost your yield with perpetual options on VaultCraft, the universal defy adapter for supercharging your crypto. With version V1.5, users can now earn options on optimism and arbitrum while also rebalancing multi-strategyield products all-in-one vault. Mint Voltron, Waltcraft's NFT reward optimizer,

to earn even more in XP points. From institutional service providers to defy DGens, anyone can deposit any asset into Valkcraft's products to instantly start earning yield on their crypto. Learn more on Valkraft.io. Pocod is the original and largest layer zero blockchain with over 2,000-plus developers. The anticipated Pocodot 2.0 upgrade

will be a massive accelerator for the ecosystem. Upgrading the infrastructure with eight times higher transaction throughput and twice as fast block times, tailored court time for the needs of every protocol, trustless bridges to multiple chains, and revise tokenomics with a token burn to reduce inflation. Perfect for GameFi and Defi to build, grow, and scale. Get your Web3 ideas to market fast.

Think big, build bigger with Pocod. Join the community at Pocodot.network slash ecosystem slash community. Back to my conversation with Evan. So as we were just saying, you know, these are kind of traditional fraud charges. happening in this environment of MEV. But as, you know, we've mentioned, there is kind of this wider question about the exploitation of MEV and just how kosher it is. And, you know, I don't know if people remember that back in the day, there was a time when MEV was kind of like a prohibitive, like exploiting it was a prohibited thing, you know, and it was very taboo to try to do that.

And then all of a sudden things flipped and suddenly it was like, we're just going to allow everybody to exploit it and have rules around it. And, you know, there are people who've pointed out that I think either the same or very similar behaviors are illegal and tradfai. And this particular case apparently prompted one anonymous researcher to say, quote, it's a little hard to sympathize with MEV bots and block builders getting fucked over by block proposers in the exact same way they are fucking over end users. So I don't know what your opinion is on, like, do you think that this is the government saying that they will never consider exploitation of MEV under the rules as something illegal or, yeah, what are your thoughts on that? I think just in the present case, they just Hagen's reach to these issues.

And also it fairs noting that this is just an indictments. You know, this is just charges being levied by the Southern District of New York, you know, by, you know, the attorneys bringing a case on behalf of the DOJ. So it's really just a government's position. It still needs to go to trial. It needs to, you know, a court needs to actually have a verdict on the case. And it's totally possible, given the facts here that the court may not, need to reach anything that has kind of finding precedential effect on, you know,

MV as a practice or or crypto systems in general just because you could say, hey, they hacked this, you know, this code, manipulated, you know, tricked and relay into revealing things and that constitutes fraud and you need not explore the issues more deeply. But, you know, to your points previously, I think that there's still so much to explore I think there isn't enough research, I think, to really inclusively come to a decision about whether MUV is good or bad in general. You know, as I noted before, there are certain things that people call MEV, like arbitrage and liquidation, you know, backrunning effectively that, you know, I personally consider, like,

critical to the way that crypto systems work. If you didn't have arbitrage keeping prices correlated, you'd have. You wouldn't have efficient markets. If you didn't have bad debt cleared from liquidity protocols, then you just have, those systems would break. So there are certain things that I think are kind of necessary for the way that crypto works. But when you look at even things like sandwiching, there are, you know, there are people that are way smarting to me that have written extensively,

including like Turin Chitra, who have written extensively about whether, MEV as a practice, even though it does harm the individual sandwiched trader may have broader market efficiency benefits or other benefits like encouraging more people to stake into a system thus increasing the economic security of the system because they want to enjoy in the benefits of MEV extraction, that these benefits, if they can be quantifiable, if they can be compared to other unquantifiable metrics, maybe those market-wide efficiency benefits outweigh, you know, one person getting worse fill on a particular trade, right? So there's interesting questions there that I think are informative of what policies should be

pursued by government seeking to either regulate or legislate around these issues, because, you know, I don't think it's as simple as saying all sandwiching is like toxic and, you know, crypto will be better. You know, if sandwiching was made illegal by the governments or something, you know, it's, it, I, it sure seems to me that the immediate effects of sandwiching is, is harmful. People are getting worse still. Liquidity pools are being, uh, drained in arguably an artificial manner.

But there seems to be these broader considerations that, again, people that are, uh, Brilliant people are writing very seriously about this. So I just have to take them seriously in good faith that there's more to explore it here than just MED equals bad and screwing over people. One thing I wanted to ask about is something that you mentioned in our pre-interviewed chat, which was that you said that you weren't aware of people who participate in this block building process, having typical terms of service or privacy policies or policies or just anything like that. But is there anything in this case that indicates either they should or if so, what that would look like or what are your thoughts on that?

Yeah, I don't know. It's interesting because I'm exploring this for the clients of mine in a different context about how if you have a system where there aren't traditional UIs, graphical user interfaces, things where, you know, websites where those. terms of service would be hosted and assented to, how can you assure that people that are interacting with each other have agreed to certain terms of conduct and how would you have a breach there? So there's, you know, I'm working on trying to design with another client of mine, you know, a command line interface effectively what we call in the law click wrap

agreements, you know, these agreements that you have to say affirmatively that you sense to in order to proceed with what you're doing. And I'm mindful of the fact that trying to do those things in something like the block building space may be difficult due to latency concerns. I mean, how do you ensure that people are sensing these things, but also not losing their place in line? So there's difficulty in design there. But hopefully those things are surmountable because here, you know, I'm aware of general terms

of service that have been. proffered by the developers of the open source code that people then take and instantiate in like running the infrastructure themselves like you're actually running into a relay or running a builder like flash bots has terms of service that say hey this is open source code and you know these are kind of the terms of using it but that's not the same thing as say you know the the ultrasound relay having its own terms of service that a builder or a validator a sense to in interacting with these people in this kind of permissionless marketplace that is known as Med-Bloops.

So, you know, in setting those those understandings, you could set forth terms that right, as of now, there's more ambiguity as to whether certain duties between people were created, between, you know, infrastructure providers were created. And if you don't know whether one actor has a duty to, another to not do something, then it's harder to say, well, you're a breach of your responsibilities to me. You harmed me in a way that's unlawful or unjust. And so like setting forth those things, I think is something interesting. I'm not, you know, personally aware of any infrastructure providers that do have those kind of, you know, commands line terms of service. But it's something

I'm interested in exploring, you know, both in this block building context as well as in other concepts like, you know, other infrastructure that I'm working on with other clients. Well, one thing I did want to ask you was I know you did work earlier on MEV and the OFAC situation, obviously, which, you know, those tornado catch sanctions happened right before the merge, which was just something that really highlighted risk to those MEV participants. So do you have any thoughts now that you are. you know, seeing this case on how that might look or if there's anything that they should be doing. I wrote this big paper like a year ago about the tornado patch sanctions and kind of the broader

implications and like context and which those things came about because I was concerned that without exploring those things in the context of what how block building actually works, the fact that there's this value being extracted from users and ultimately being redirected to these people that sit in privileged positions, that without that context, people may be acting under assumptions about their broader liability. And when I was, you know, the thing I was particularly writing about is like sanctions law, which when you're touching the national security apparatus, and the laws that attain to that, you have, at worst, very severe punishments that include, like,

the law severe liberty, which are not necessarily present outside of, you know, fraud in the financial markets. Like, you're not going to prison for Section 5 securities violation. It's not a crime. It's a civil infraction. So, you know, the stakes are much higher in the sanctions environments, the national security environments, other things like, you know, anti-money laundering, all these things that kind of concern the broader security of kind of the United States and its partners and allies. And so I was writing about it in that context, but just in exploring these things, I was just seeing that these elements of MEV were just kind of,

it didn't seem like people were, had them top of minds when they were thinking about, the way that the law applies to this infrastructure because it's you know before a lot of this stuff became you know everyone that's on a dex is more or less aware if you're if you're crypto native about slippage and what slippage implicates with respect to you know how mb is extracted you know as you're saying a lot of these things were just you had to be very inside baseball to know that these things were even happening, much less they were happening to you. And so I think that in the year since I was writing about the sanction stuff, that awareness has spread not only throughout the user base of crypto natives on Ethereum, but also you're just seeing it more and more throughout

the regulators who are paying attention in this space, whether it's the DOJ with their very, you know, a very good, comprehensive description of the way that Flashwads works in this indictment. Or, you know, I've heard in this past November, I think the beginning of November, I heard from one of the lobbying groups in D.C. that the SEC was holding, I think, its first internal hearings on MEP, and this was this past November. So, you know, I don't know personally what's happened since then, but that's, you know, evidence that the financial regulators are paying more attention to this.

You see it in there was a report by an international securities board or body called Iosco, where they were speaking a lot about finding, you know, ways to regulate these markets and finding actors that are in control, like, you know, intermediary actors that are in control and finding ways to regulate these actors. And I forget if they specifically mentioned MEV in their role. reports, but a lot of the kind of bullet points that they were running down about people being controlled these systems really reflected back on my exploration of the locuses of control in these systems as it pertains to the sanctions compliance. And so I think there's just a broader exploration

about whether these actors are completely separate. separated from the system and if they're not completely separated from the system, if they're integral to the system, are they, you know, purely neutral market actors or are they acting in some self-interested way that either implicates, you know, as I was writing about previously sanctioned stuff or as you were just kind of mentioning, you know, that kind of self-interested acting could implicate things like whether they are subject to market manipulation charges. And there's a ton of nuance around the law of market manipulation, which if we have any time happy to talk about it, otherwise I can definitely refer the audience to some great academic

writing on the topic. Well, why don't you go ahead and do that? Because we are actually over time. So if you have particular things you think they should look up, we can put them in the show notes. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, a friend of mine, Mikhailai, Marshenowitz, out of the University of Surrey, has written multiple, very comprehensive studies of sandwiching as it pertains to U.S. law, particularly market manipulation. Yeah, happy to put a link to that particular paper in the notes. And he and his co-authors have written his great stuff. He's great stuff that he's kind of a leading academic in my mind on these issues of MEP and the law. And, you know, I think a lot of these things, I mean, he's the only guy that I've seen right

so comprehensively about them. And so he's like, he's, he's just exploring them in the abstract. So we haven't even gotten to the place where there's, you know, facts on the ground, charges being filed either by the government or in private lawsuits. So there's so much, you were still very early, I think, in the figuring out. the way that things lie here, both on, you know, whether things are illegal or, you know, the policy implications of, you know, whether we should abide these things or not. All right. Well, we will point to those in the show notes. But, Evan, this was super interesting. Thank you so much for coming on Unchained.

Thanks, Laura. Appreciate it. Don't forget. Next up is the weekly news recap. Today, presented by Wondercraft AI. Stick around for this week in crypto after this short break. Bet mode activated. The scorebed app here with trusted stats and real-time sports news. Yeah, hey, who should I take in the Boston game? Well, statistically speaking. Nah, no more statistically speaking.

I want hot takes. I want knee-jerk reactions. That's not really what I do. Is that because you don't have any knees? Or... The score bet. Trusted sports content, seamless sports betting. Download today.

19 plus, Ontario only. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or the gambling of someone close to you, please go to Connixontario. Did you know you can buy and sell crypto with tax benefits in an individual retirement account? I trust capital makes this possible. But what does this mean? When you buy crypto outside an IRA, like on an exchange, you face taxes on gains. But in an IRA, like a Roth IRA, gains can be tax-free.

I-Trust Capital also has some of the lowest fees in the industry and 24-7 accessibility. Start now and maximize your retirement savings with I-Trust Capital. Welcome to this week's Crypto Roundup. In today's recap, Tornado Cash developer gets 64 months for money laundering. The Senate votes to overturn the SEC's crypto rule, but Biden may veto it. Wisconsin makes a historic Bitcoin ETF investment. Roaring Kitty's return boosts Salana's GME Mima Coin. Biden shuts down a Chinese crypto mining operation near a U.S. missile base.

FTX's Ryan Salame seeks an 18-month sentence. Pump. Fun faces a flash loan attack. DGEN chain recovers from a two-day outage. Block Tower Capital suffers a major hack. A cipher protocol insider admits to a $300,000 theft. Circle relocates to the U.S. ahead of its IPO. Let's begin. Tornado cash developer sentenced to 64 months in prison for money laundering. A Dutch court has convicted Alexei Perzhe, a developer of Tornado Cash, for laundering $2.2 billion

through the crypto mixer platform. Perzsche, a 31-year-old Russian living, in the Netherlands, received a sentence of five years and four months. The court ruled that Tornado Cash was primarily a tool for criminals, facilitating illicit activities. Judge Henriquezlar said of Tornado Cash that the criminal user is fully facilitated. Perzav's defense argued that as an open source developer, he couldn't control how Tornado Cash was used. However, this argument was rejected. The verdict is expected to significantly impact the development of privacy-focused defy tools, creating a chilling effect on open-source projects. Tornado Cash was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury in August 2022 for its role in laundering funds

stolen by North Korean hackers. On Thursday, Perzev appealed his conviction, seeking to challenge the guilty verdict and potentially serve his sentence at home during the appeal process. Senate votes to overturn SEC's crypto accounting rule. The U.S. Senate voted on Thursday to overturn the SEC's Staff Accounting Bulletin, 121, which sets accounting standards for firms that custody cryptocurrency. This decision follows a similar vote in the House, but the latest resolution is expected to be vetoed by President Joe Biden, SAB 121, introduced in 2022, mandates that firms holding crypto must list customer holdings as liabilities. Critics argue that this rule could hinder banks from managing digital assets.

The White House maintains that rescinding the bulletin would destabilize financial markets. The blockchain association wrote on X, the threat of a presidential veto denies the fact that there is a growing awareness among the voting public, particularly young people, that crypto is something our elected officials should care about. President Biden's veto would require a two-thirds majority in both chambers to be overridden, a challenging feat given the current vote counts. Wisconsin makes historic Bitcoin ETF investment.

The state of Wisconsin Investment Board has made a groundbreaking purchase of nearly $100 million worth of Black Rock's spot Bitcoin ETF in the first quarter of the year. This acquisition of 94,562 shares marks the first instance of a state-level institution publicly declaring such a significant investment in Bitcoin ETFs. In addition to Black Rock's ETF, SWIB also acquired shares. of gray scale's Bitcoin Trust valued at around $64 million. Together, these investments total over $162 million, underscoring the growing institutional interest in Bitcoin as a viable asset. Normally, you don't see large institutions like state pensions investing in new ETFs so quickly,

but these are exceptional launches, wrote Eric Balchunis, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg on X. He added, expect more institutions to follow suit as they often move in herds. Roaring Kitty's return fuels Salana GME surge. Keith Gill, also known as Roaring Kitty, has made a dramatic return to social media, igniting a massive rally in Salana's GME meme coin. Gill, famous for his role in the GameStop trading frenzy of 2021, posted a meme on X after nearly three years of silence,

sending the GME token soaring by 1,418% within 20,000. hours. The token saw a trading volume of over $101 million, making it the fourth most traded asset on the Salana network, according to blockchain analytics firm, Birdeye. Gills Post, a meme of a gamer getting serious, symbolized his return and quickly went viral, attracting over 26 million views. This resurgence of activity also lifted other related tokens, such as GameStop and GME on the base network. Gill's reappearance has not only influenced. the crypto market, but also led to significant gains in traditional finance. GameStop stock jumped 74% to $30.47. Refecting the widespread impact of his online presence. Roaring Kitty's

enigmatic posts featuring scenes from popular movies and TV shows suggesting that more activity could be on the horizon have left his followers eager for what's next. Biden shuts down Chinese crypto mining near U.S. missile base. President Joe Biden has ordered the show. of a Chinese-owned cryptocurrency mining operation situated near Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, citing national security concerns. The Mine One facility, located within a mile of the base, housing Minuteman the three nuclear missiles, was found to be using foreign source technology, raising significant security issues. The White House stated that the British Virgin Islands registered company, predominantly owned by Chinese nationals, initiated operations without proper

clearance from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. This oversight triggered an investigation following a tip-off. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen said, this action underscores our commitment to ensuring foreign investments do not compromise sensitive U.S. military sites or involve critical technologies. The President's order mandates the removal of all mining equipment from the site and authorizes the Attorney General to enforce this directive. Meanwhile, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission initiated a proposal to ban trading on political events, reflecting a lengthy legal battle to protect public interest against prediction market trading. In regulation-related news, the SEC refuted Coinbase's demand for completely new crypto regulations,

arguing the existing rules are workable and don't need an overhaul. In the same week, which has been packed with controversy around crypto and political issues, Coinbase-initiated non-profit stand with crypto, launched a pact to support political candidates favorable to the crypto community with plans to back five congressional races. Former FTX executive Ryan Salami seeks 18-month sentence. Ryan Salome, a former executive at FTX Digital Markets, has requested a sentence of no more than 18 months in prison.

Salome pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges related to illegal political contributions and operating an unlicensed money transmission business. Despite not being required to cooperate as part of his plea deal, Salame provided assistance to prosecutors in the case against former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Frid, who was sentenced to 25 years. Salamay's lawyers emphasized his lack of involvement in the misappropriation of customer funds and his belief in the legitimacy of FTX. Salame's legal team presented over two dozen letters of support,

including testimonies from former colleagues. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for May 28th. On Thursday, former Alameda Research co-CEO Sam Trebucko submitted a character reference for Ryan Salame ahead of his trial. Trebucko, who described Salame as his best friend, acknowledged Salami's illicit activities, but called for fair consequences. Highlighting their deep and unlikely friendship,

Trebucko emphasized Salome's positive qualities and significant impact on his life, urging the court to consider Salamay's character in addition to his actions when determining his punishment. Pump. Fun exploited through flash loan attack. Pump. Fun, a Solana-based meme coin launchpad, suffered a significant exploit by a former employee who used flash loans to manipulate bonding curves for new tokens. The attacker, identified as stack, publicly claimed responsibility, citing personal distress as motivation. The exploit involved using flash loans to quickly buy out bonding curves

and repay the loans before the tokens launched on Radium, causing Pump. Dot Fund to lose around 12,000 Seoul, which accounts for over $2 million. In response, Pump. Fund paused trading and upgraded its contracts to prevent similar attacks. Despite the attack, the team assured users that bonding curve contracts with locked LPs on Radium remain secure, and all connected wallets are safe.

gen chain suffers two-day outage. D-Gen chain, an Ethereum layer three blockchain, experienced a 53-hour outage that halted block production and rendered decentralized applications and bridges unusable. The interruption began on May 12th when Conduit, a roll-up infrastructure platform, made a custom configuration change that caused disruptions. The network is back online as Conduit re-synchronized its nodes from the Genesis block. Conduit filtered transactions from five addresses with millions of failed transactions to expedite the network's recovery. A detailed postmortem of the incident will be provided by conduit, which acknowledge support from off-chain labs and syndicate in resolving the issues.

Block Tower Capital hit by Major Hack. Block Tower Capital, a prominent crypto investment firm managing $1.7 billion in assets, has fallen victim to a significant hack, resulting in substantial losses from its main hedge fund. According to sources familiar with the situation, the firm has yet to recover the stolen funds and the perpetrator remains unidentified. In response, BlockTower has enlisted blockchain forensics experts to investigate the breach and trace the stolen assets. The firm recently informed its limited partners about the incident but declined to comment publicly. In related news, Saan Finance on Optimism was exploited for $20 million due to a vulnerability in forks of

compound finance. All markets on optimism were paused. A list of exploiter wallet addresses was published, and efforts are underway to recover the funds. Cipher Protocol Insider admits to $300,000 theft. The Solana-based decentralized exchange cipher protocol is grappling with internal betrayal as a core contributor, known pseudonymously as Hoke, confessed to stealing approximately $300,000 from a fund established to recover from a prior exploit. Hoke, who had stayed on to help rebuild the project after a $1 million hack in August, admitted to taking the funds and gambling them away. Hoke executed 36 withdrawals from the recovery wallet.

He said, I know likely nothing I say or do will make things better, perhaps other than rotting in jail, citing a crippling gambling addiction as the motive behind his actions. This is incredibly saddening to me, said Barrett, another core contributor who disclosed the theft on social media and has reported hoke to law enforcement. Barrett added, I never thought this would be a possibility. Having a core contributor who stayed on after the exploit to try and rebuild the project be the one who rugged funds from the redemption contract. The Cipher Protocol team is now working with authorities to address the theft and ensure justice is served. Circle moves legal base to U.S. ahead of planned IPO.

Circle, the issuer of the USDC Stablecoin, has filed to relocate its legal domicile from Ireland to the United States, as first reported by Bloomberg. This move comes ahead of Circle's planned initial public offering in the U.S. The company's spokesperson confirmed the filing but declined to provide further details on the decision. Circle CEO Jeremy Aller emphasized the strategic importance of this shift. positioning ourselves in the U.S. aligns with our long-term vision for growth and regulatory clarity, Allaire said. U.S.D.C., Circle Stable Coin, holds the position of the second largest in the market, with a market cap of approximately $33 billion, trailing behind Tethers U.S.D.T,

Binance monitorship assigned to Forensic Risk Alliance. The U.S. Department of Justice has appointed Forensic Risk Alliance to monitor Binance Holdings limited for three years following its plea deal for violating money laundering regulations and trade sanctions. Binance agreed to pay $4.3 billion in penalties, and CEO Changpeng Zhao stepped down, receiving a four-month prison sentence. Forensic Risk Alliance was chosen over Sullivan and Cromwell, which faced criticism for its handling of the FDX bankruptcy. As monitor, FRA will ensure Binance complies with the plea agreement, accessing internal records, and reporting to the government.

Hey, all, I'm excited to share some news with you. Unchained has launched a new Crypto and Macro podcast. I highly recommend you watch the first episode of Bits and Bips, exploring how crypto and macro collide, one basis point at a time. Posted by experts James Sefert, Alex Kruger, and Joe McCann, they dive into why we might be in a super cycle, an intriguing theory on what the SEC might say about Eith, Tethers business, and much more. Don't miss it. And that's it. Thanks for joining us today. Unchained is produced by me, Laura Shin, with help from Matt Pilcher, Juan Romanovich, Megan Gavis, Pamma Jimdar, and Margaret Curia. Thanks for listening. Unchained is now a part of the Coin Desk Podcast Network. For the latest in digital assets, check out markets daily five days a week with host Noel Atchison. Follow the Coin Desk Podcast Network for some of the best shows in crypto.