Today's Cryptocurrency Prices by Market Caps
The global cryptocurrency market cap today i $2.39T
Market Cap
$2.39T
24h Trading Volume
$51.42B
BTC Dominance
56.34%
|
#
|
Name
|
Price
|
1h %
|
24h %
|
7d %
|
Market Cap
|
Volume (24h)
|
Chart (7d) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
—
|
|||||||
|
No cryptocurrencies found Try adjusting your search query |
||||||||
Latest Crypto News
View All News
Drift: $270M Heist Was Six‑Month North Korean Intelligence Operation Targeting Multisig
Drift says $270M heist was a six‑month North Korean intelligence operation Drift Protocol says the $270 million drain of its vaults on April 1 was the culmination of a six‑month intelligence operation by a North Korea–linked group, according to a detailed incident update published by the team. The report lays out a slow, deliberate campaign of relationship‑building, in‑person meetings, technical infiltration and ultimately the theft of pre‑signed multisig transactions. What happened — timeline at a glance - Fall 2025: Attackers first made contact at a major crypto conference, posing as a quantitative trading firm looking to integrate with Drift. They presented verifiable professional backgrounds, technical fluency and a clear understanding of the protocol. - Fall 2025–Spring 2026: A Telegram group and months of standard onboarding conversations followed, including discussions of trading strategies and vault integrations. - Dec 2025–Jan 2026: The group onboarded an Ecosystem Vault, held multiple working sessions with Drift contributors, deposited more than $1 million of their own capital and established an operational presence inside the ecosystem. - Feb–Mar 2026: Drift contributors met members of the group face‑to‑face at several industry conferences across different countries. - April 1, 2026: Dormant, pre‑signed multisig transactions were executed, enabling a durable‑nonce style exploit that drained $270 million in under a minute. How they breached defenses Drift says the compromise used two main vectors: 1) A TestFlight app the attackers presented as a wallet product. TestFlight distributes pre‑release iOS apps and bypasses App Store review, making it an attractive channel for a convincing malicious client. 2) A repository compromise rooted in a widely‑flagged vulnerability in popular code editors (VSCode and Cursor). The flaw allowed silent arbitrary code execution merely by opening a file or folder in the editor — no prompts, warnings, or user action required. Once devices used by trusted contributors were compromised, attackers were able to obtain the multisig approvals needed to execute the stored transactions. Those pre‑signed transactions had been sitting dormant for more than a week before the April 1 execution that emptied the vaults. Attribution: UNC4736 (AppleJeus / Citrine Sleet) Drift attributes the operation to UNC4736 — a group tracked under names such as AppleJeus and Citrine Sleet — based on on‑chain fund flows that trace back to the Radiant Capital attackers and operational overlaps with known DPRK‑linked personas. Drift notes the people who met contributors in person were not North Korean nationals; high‑level DPRK actors are known to use third‑party intermediaries with fully constructed identities and employment histories to pass due diligence. Why this matters for DeFi security Drift’s update raises uncomfortable questions for an industry that relies heavily on multisig governance: - The attackers invested months and more than $1 million to build trust, meet teams in person, contribute real capital and sit dormant until execution — a model specifically designed to defeat superficial due diligence. - The vector through everyday developer tools and a TestFlight app shows how small user vectors — device compromise, developer IDEs, pre‑release apps — can cascade into catastrophic protocol losses. - Drift urges protocols to audit access controls, treat every device that can sign multisig approvals as a potential target, and re‑examine assumptions about what onboarding and on‑chain signals of legitimacy actually mean. In short: if adversaries are willing to run costly, patient intelligence campaigns that blend real capital, in‑person contact and deep technical subterfuge, DeFi teams must assume trusted access equals a threat vector and harden both human and technical attack surfaces accordingly. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Ant Group launches Anvita — a platform for AI agents to hold assets, trade and settle in USDC
Ant Group’s blockchain unit has launched a platform designed to let software agents, rather than humans, become the primary actors in crypto transactions. At its Real Up summit in Cannes, Ant Digital Technologies introduced Anvita — a two-pronged bet on what the firm calls an “agent-to-agent economy.” The system is intended to let autonomous AI programs hold assets, execute trades, coordinate services and settle payments with minimal human intervention. Anvita debuts with two core products. Anvita TaaS (Tokenization-as-a-Service) targets institutions, offering tokenization of real-world assets alongside custody and treasury tools. Anvita Flow is built for the agents themselves: a registry and discovery layer where agents can find counterparts, coordinate tasks and settle payments in real time. “The real transformation lies in moving toward an onchain agentic economy, where autonomous agents will not just analyze data — they will hold assets, execute trades, and optimize portfolios,” said Zhuoqun Bian, president of Ant Digital Technologies’ blockchain business. A key technical component is integration of the x402 protocol — developed by Coinbase and Cloudflare — which enables stablecoin payments directly over HTTP. Agents on Anvita can reportedly complete sub-cent transactions instantly using USDC, removing reliance on traditional billing, subscription systems or manual approvals. The platform also includes an Agent Store with plug-and-play modules for data collection, financial analysis and gaming; developers can list agents and use popular frameworks such as OpenClaw and Claude Code, with flexible hosting options. Ant Digital frames Anvita as extending tokenized assets from “static infrastructure” into an active onchain economy: agents could allocate capital, execute trades, provide services and automatically settle micro-payments as they interact. Anvita arrives amid growing industry activity around agent-based commerce and payments. Visa and Coinbase have each published competing approaches — Visa with a Trusted Agent Protocol aimed at card-rail checkouts, Coinbase with x402 for stablecoin micropayments — and Google released an Agent Payments Protocol (AP2) in September backed by more than 60 organizations. Traditional networks are moving too: Mastercard’s $1.8 billion acquisition of stablecoin firm BVNK is the largest stablecoin infrastructure deal to date. Onchain activity shows early signs but remains mixed. The Solana Foundation says its network has already processed more than 15 million agent transactions, and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has predicted agents will eventually outpace humans in transaction volume. McKinsey projects AI agents could mediate $3 trillion to $5 trillion of global consumer commerce by 2030. At the same time, x402’s current onchain volume is modest — roughly $28,000 a day — much of it testing, and Artemis analysts have flagged about half of observed transactions as artificial activity. Ant Digital’s blockchain already supports tokenized assets from various financial institutions. The company is pursuing USDC integration with Circle and applying for stablecoin licenses in Hong Kong, Singapore and Luxembourg as it pushes Anvita into live use. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Bitcoin Holds Near $67K as 'Extreme Fear' Grips Market — ETFs Prop Up Price Amid Whale Selling
Bitcoin is holding its ground near $67,100 on Sunday after a flat weekend, but market mood has soured to its most negative point since the Iran conflict began on February 28. Social sentiment data from Santiment shows bearish chatter now outpaces bullish commentary by a ratio of five-to-four—the most one-sided reading in five weeks. The last time sentiment skewed this heavily was the day Operation Epic Fury began, when bitcoin slipped below $65,000. Across X, Reddit, Telegram and other channels, bearish discussion is at its highest level since the conflict started. The Fear & Greed Index underscores the gloom: it sits at 9—deep in “extreme fear”—and has been trapped between 8 and 14 for more than a month. That sustained single-digit reading without a corresponding price collapse is rare; comparable troughs in 2022 accompanied big capitulation events like the LUNA crash and FTX collapse, which produced 20–30% single-day drawdowns. This time, however, bitcoin is grinding sideways in a $65,000–$73,000 range while sentiment deteriorates. Price and sentiment are telling different stories. Over the past five weeks bitcoin has weathered war headlines, political speeches, a $403 million liquidation event, and some of the weakest on-chain demand in years, yet remains within about 5% of its pre-conflict level. The reason it hasn’t broken down is visible in institutional flows. In March, ETFs soaked up roughly 50,000 BTC—the strongest monthly inflow since October 2025—and strategy funds added another ~44,000 BTC. Morgan Stanley also won approval for a bitcoin ETF at a 14-basis-point fee, unlocking access to 16,000 advisors and $6.2 trillion in assets under management. That institutional bid is clearly providing a price floor. Still, the floor may be the only thing holding. A CoinDesk analysis from early Saturday estimated 30-day apparent demand at negative 63,000 BTC, indicating the wider market is selling faster than institutions can absorb. Large holders (1,000–10,000 BTC) have flipped from adding about 200,000 BTC a year ago to removing roughly 188,000 BTC today—one of the most aggressive distribution cycles on record. April seasonality has traditionally favored bitcoin—historically finishing green in 10 of 15 years with an average gain of 20.9%—but plenty of headwinds remain: geopolitical risk, a negative Coinbase premium, record whale selling, and a Fear & Greed Index stuck in single digits. For now, institutional demand is propping up price, but the broader market’s selling pressure and collapsing sentiment leave the picture vulnerable. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Bitcoin vs. Quantum: Keys Breakable in <9 Minutes, Devs Race to Protect 6.5M BTC
Quantum alarm bells are ringing across Bitcoin — and not because a working quantum machine has already arrived, but because new research suggests it may be closer than many hoped. Recent Google findings indicate a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could crack Bitcoin’s core cryptography in under nine minutes — faster than the network’s average block time. Some analysts put a credible timeline on the risk as early as 2029. Given that millions of BTC sit in addresses already exposed, developers are racing to design practical defenses. Why Bitcoin is vulnerable (briefly) - Bitcoin security depends on a private key (secret) and a public key (derived from the private key). To spend coins you produce a signature with the private key; the network verifies it against the public key without revealing the secret. - Classical computers would take billions of years to reverse-engineer the private key from a public key using elliptic curve cryptography (ECDSA / Schnorr). But quantum algorithms such as Shor’s could change that calculus. - There are two exposure windows: - Long-exposure: addresses that have their public keys already visible on-chain (e.g., early Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) addresses and some Taproot/P2TR outputs). Roughly 1.7 million BTC sit in old P2PK addresses, including coins attributed to Satoshi. - Short-exposure: the mempool — unconfirmed transactions broadcast to the network reveal public keys and signatures briefly before being included in a block. A quantum attacker with enough speed could try to derive private keys during that small window. What’s at stake - Analysts estimate about 6.5 million BTC are in addresses a quantum computer could directly target, placing potentially hundreds of billions of dollars at risk and threatening Bitcoin’s core principles of “trust the code” and sound, censorship-resistant money. Key proposals and technical defenses under discussion Developers have several lines of defense, some meant for future-issued addresses, others to protect transactions in flight, and some to limit damage to already-exposed coins. - BIP-360 / Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR) - What: New output type that avoids embedding a permanent public key on-chain by instead committing to a Merkle root. The public key is revealed only when spending. - Why it helps: With no on-chain public key to study, long-exposure attacks have no fixed target. - Caveat: It protects newly created addresses going forward; it doesn’t automatically safeguard coins already in exposed addresses. Lightning, multisig and other features can still work with this design. - Hash-based post-quantum signatures: SPHINCS+ (SLH-DSA) and variants - What: SPHINCS+ (standardized by NIST in August 2024 as FIPS 205 / SLH-DSA) is a signature scheme built on hash functions, believed resilient to quantum attacks that threaten elliptic-curve schemes. - Trade-offs: SPHINCS+ signatures are roughly 8 kilobytes or more vs Bitcoin’s current ~64-byte signatures, dramatically increasing block-space usage and fees. - Ongoing work: SHRIMPS and SHRINCS are follow-up proposals that aim to retain SPHINCS+’s post-quantum security while shrinking signature sizes to make adoption feasible for a blockchain. - Commit-and-Reveal (mempool protection) — Tadge Dryja’s soft fork - What: Split transaction spending into a two-phase process: first commit a hash (a sealed “intent”) on-chain; later reveal the actual spend including the public key. - Why it helps: If a quantum attacker tries to forge a competing transaction during the mempool window, the network will reject it because it lacks a prior commitment. This defends against short-exposure attacks. - Trade-offs: It effectively doubles transaction interaction and increases fees; treated as an interim, practical bridge rather than a final solution. - Hourglass V2 (mitigating the existing-exposure risk) - What: A proposal to throttle how quickly coins in known vulnerable addresses can be sold — for example, limiting spend to one BTC per block from those addresses. - Rationale: Prevents a “bank run” style mass liquidation that could crash markets if many exposed coins are suddenly drained. - Controversy: Critics argue it violates the principle that no one should be able to restrict your ability to spend your coins; limits on movement are politically and technically fraught. Where things stand and what to expect - None of these changes are activated. Bitcoin’s decentralized governance — involving developers, miners, exchanges, and node operators — makes upgrades deliberate and slow by design. - The issue has been on developers’ radar for some time; the recent Google paper has accelerated public attention but not introduced fundamentally new ideas. Work on proposals like P2MR, hash-based signatures, mempool defenses and mitigation schemes predates the report. - Adoption pathways will weigh security, complexity, cost (block-space and fees), and philosophical trade-offs about permissionless spending and market stability. Bottom line Quantum computers capable of instantly breaking Bitcoin’s cryptography aren’t yet a present-day reality, but credible research and timelines mean the community must act proactively. The debate is now about which combination of immediate, medium- and long-term changes will preserve Bitcoin’s security without sacrificing its core properties — and how to deploy them in a network designed to resist rushed or centralized changes. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
XRP Could Dip to $0.83 Before Rallying to $8.30, Analyst Says
Crypto analyst Egrag Crypto says XRP could be setting up for a dramatic rebound — but first, the token may need to fall further to find a definitive bottom. Key takeaway - Egrag sees a nearly nine-month falling-wedge on XRP’s chart. The token is trading around $1.30 and may drop toward about $0.83 before a larger reversal that could ultimately target $8.30. What’s happening with XRP now - XRP has logged six straight months of losses — its worst run since 2014 — and April opened down about 1.8%. If April closes red, it would be the seventh consecutive monthly loss, a first in the token’s history. - The token peaked at $3.60 in July 2025 and has since been squeezed between two downward-sloping trendlines. That back-and-forth compression is what forms the falling-wedge pattern Egrag highlights. The wedge and the trade setup - Upper resistance: Egrag places the wedge’s ceiling near $1.80. Historically that region has capped rallies; earlier this year, XRP topped around $2.41 in January 2026 and then pulled back. - Lower support: The analyst identifies a confluence around $0.83 where the wedge’s lower trendline meets a long-term ascending “Atlas Line.” This is called the major floor for the current structure. How a rebound could play out (per the analysis) - First, a rebound toward the $1.80 resistance is possible. If that fails and price follows the wedge, XRP could slide to roughly $0.83. - From the $0.83 area, the chart suggests a bounce back above $1.00, a retest near $0.91, and then the start of a larger upward move. If that breakout sequence materializes, Egrag’s target is roughly $8.30. Past action that supports the pattern - The wedge has already absorbed big swings: on Oct. 10, 2025, XRP fell from about $2.80 to $1.36 and bounced off the lower trendline; in early Feb. 2026 it dropped to $1.11 before support held. Risks — what would invalidate the setup - Bullish invalidation: a monthly close above $1.80 would break the wedge and kill this specific bearish-to-bullish setup. - Bearish invalidation: a decisive break below the $0.83–$0.91 support zone would point to deeper weakness and raise the prospect of a larger downside than the pattern projects. Bottom line Egrag’s view frames the current weakness as a potential buying opportunity if XRP finds support around the Atlas Line near $0.83 and follows the retest-and-run script. But traders should watch the two trigger levels — a monthly close above $1.80 to invalidate the wedge, or a break below the $0.83–$0.91 zone to signal further trouble. Source: Egrag Crypto chart; featured image from Pexels, chart from TradingView. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news
Bitcoin On-Chain Data Hints At Macro Bottom Near $47,960 – Details
The Bitcoin bear market is now six months in and showing no signs of letting up. During this time, a cycle low of $60,000 was established, preceding the present consolidation action being seen. However, bearish sentiments remain at heightened levels, especially considering the disturbed geopolitical landscape of the past month. While there have been encouraging signs of ongoing institutional accumulation, there are still expectations of a market bottom, which would confirm a bullish trend reversal. Related Reading: Bitcoin Price Breakdown To $45,000: The Levels To Watch Out For Next Steps Bitcoin ‘Ultimate Support’ Lies At $47,960 – Analyst In an X post on April 4, renowned analyst Ali Martinez shares a critical insight on the Bitcoin market structure, predicting the macro bottom amid an enduring corrective phase. This analysis is based on the Cumulative Value Days Destroyed (CVDD), an on-chain metric used to estimate Bitcoin’s long-term price floor by measuring the cumulative value of “Coin Days Destroyed” over time. For context, Coin Days Destroyed measures how long coins were held before being spent, with older coins having more coin days destroyed upon any on-chain movement. The cumulative value of the CDD, when adjusted, creates the CVDD that tracks the price level at which long-term holders are likely to distribute their coins, thus forming a macro market bottom. The importance of token distribution by long-term holders comes from the ownership change with new participants, injecting fresh capital. A macro bottom is presumed to be formed at this level because it represents a new cost basis, which the new holders are likely to defend, transforming it into a key support level. According to Martinez, the present CVDD price floor is at $47,960, which the analyst recognizes as the ultimate support zone. Notably. Bitcoin trades at $66,683, indicating there is still significant room for a downside despite the price dip since the bear market commenced in October 2025. If Bitcoin dips to the CVDD floor, historical data shows consistent proof of a major rebound. Considering this pattern, Martinez refers to this price level ($47,960) as the structural foundation of the Bitcoin market. Related Reading: XRP Has Never Been This Quiet On Binance. Discover If The Silence Is A Warning or a Setup Bitcoin Price Overview At the time of writing, Bitcoin trades at $67,279 after a slight increase of 0.69% in the past day and 0.72% in the past week. The maiden cryptocurrency has experienced a cumulative devaluation of 46.7% in this bear market, bringing its total cap to around $1.34 trillion. However, Bitcoin’s influence in the crypto ecosystem remains strong with a market dominance of 58.1%. Featured image from iStock, chart from Tradingview