Cryptocurrency theft is estimated to generate half of the country’s foreign currency income
North Korea plays by its own rules. The isolated, secretive and autocratic country is largely cut off from the world’s economic system – but when it comes to generating foreign earnings it relies on some of the world’s most sophisticated hacking.
Experts, such as TRM Labs, quickly attributed the extraordinary $6.3bn (£4.7bn) Binance cryptocurrency theft to TraderTraitor, an elite North Korean hacking unit that has also been known as the Lazarus Group. Though the link may not be proven yet, the pattern of behaviour is familiar.
Meta settled a social media addiction lawsuit with an 18-year-old plaintiff on Friday, avoiding its next bellwether trial, which began jury selection this week. The case, filed by a woman from Mississippi dubbed “K.D.B.,” alleged her use of Instagram and Snapchat as a child worsened her mental health and contributed to her eating disorder, suicidal…
Meta settled a social media addiction lawsuit with an 18-year-old plaintiff on Friday, avoiding its next bellwether trial, which began jury selection this week. The case, filed by a woman from Mississippi dubbed “K.D.B.,” alleged her use of Instagram and Snapchat as a child worsened her mental health and contributed to her eating disorder, suicidal…
We can see everything in “You Can See Everything,” but seeing is not the same as knowing. Fielder and Oppenheim’s film is so effective because it knows that too.
We can see everything in “You Can See Everything,” but seeing is not the same as knowing. Fielder and Oppenheim’s film is so effective because it knows that too.
ISLAMABAD – Billions of dollars vanished from leading cryptocurrency exchange Binance wallets in matter of minutes, leaving crypto-world stunned. As investigators race to trace staggering $6.3 billion heist, suspicion is turning towards North Korea’s Lazarus hacking network. But did Pyongyang really mastermind what could be the biggest crypto theft in history?
The extraordinary cyberattack, which hits world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, jolted global digital asset market after hackers allegedly moved billions of dollars out of Binance-controlled wallets, with most of the theft unfolding within half an hour. The amount stolen is more than four times the $1.5 billion lost in the infamous Bybit breach in February 2025, showing unprecedented scale of latest attack.
While perpetrators have not been officially identified, two major blockchain intelligence firms, TRM Labs and Chainalysis, have expressed high confidence that North Korean cybercriminals were responsible. The suspected organisation is TraderTraitor, a sophisticated hacking operation associated with the Lazarus Group, which has previously been linked to major cryptocurrency thefts.
North Korea under Spotlight over Crypto Theft
Investigators believe Binance operation bears striking similarities to earlier attacks attributed to North Korean state-linked hackers. TRM Labs said its investigation uncovered technical patterns and operational methods consistent with previous TraderTraitor campaigns.
Chainalysis reported suspicious movements of stolen cryptocurrency, including transactions in which assets linked to the Binance breach were mixed with funds from another recent exchange attack widely attributed to North Korean actors. The findings have strengthened suspicions that the same hacking network may be responsible for multiple major cryptocurrency thefts.
North Korea repeatedly denied accusations of sponsoring cybercrime, while Binance has not confirmed any connection between the attackers and Pyongyang. For years, Western authorities have accused North Korean hacking organisations of stealing cryptocurrencies to generate foreign currency, evade international financial restrictions and potentially support the country’s weapons programmes.
However, the latest allegations remain intelligence assessments rather than a confirmed finding by law enforcement authorities.
The scale of the operation has raised serious questions about the security systems protecting the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange. Binance co-CEO Richard Teng disclosed that the attackers carried out a complex, coordinated intrusion rather than simply exploiting a single employee’s compromised computer.
An initial investigation suggested that a developer’s laptop had been breached, potentially providing access to internal systems.
According to blockchain security researchers, the attackers manipulated transaction-authorisation mechanisms involving Ethereum’s EIP-7702 functionality, enabling malicious instructions to drain cryptocurrency from an internet-connected wallet. The operation involved multiple blockchains, with digital assets rapidly transferred into addresses controlled by the attackers.
Teng also described the use of a self-destruct mechanism designed to erase parts of the attackers’ tools and reduce the digital evidence available to investigators. Binance has said it has not found evidence that wallet private keys were leaked.
US Secret Service on Hunt for Stolen Money
US Secret Service becomes involved in investigation, working alongside financial crime specialists, private-sector partners and law enforcement agencies. Investigators are attempting to trace the stolen assets, identify cryptocurrency addresses used by the attackers and prevent the funds from being converted into other digital currencies or withdrawn through exchanges.
The agency is coordinating with the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and other authorities to identify those responsible and potentially bring criminal charges. FBI has also acknowledged awareness of the incident. Authorities have cautioned that the investigation remains at an early stage, with further details expected as forensic teams examine the breach.
Despite unprecedented theft, Binance and its partners have made progress in restricting access to some of the stolen cryptocurrency. The exchange said approximately $3 billion in affected assets had been located, while stablecoin issuers and blockchain organisations moved to freeze billions of dollars linked to the attack.
Companies involved in restricting stolen assets include Tether and Circle, whose digital currencies were among those targeted. However, freezing cryptocurrency does not automatically mean the money has been recovered or returned to Binance. The exchange has pledged to cover customer losses and allocated more than $6.34 billion in company funds and assets to address the financial impact.
Binance also temporarily suspended withdrawals while engineers conducted additional security checks. Teng said the platform would restore withdrawal services only after completing rigorous testing, with an updated proof-of-reserves report planned to reassure customers about the exchange’s holdings.
Biggest breaches so far
Platform
Year
Cryptocurrency stolen
Binance
2026
$6.3 billion
Bybit
2025
$1.5 billion
Poly Network
2021
$600 million
Ronin Network
2022
$540 million
Binance theft alone exceeds the combined losses from these three previous major incidents. Security experts have also warned that cryptocurrency criminals are increasingly targeting individual investors through online fraud, stolen credentials and even physical intimidation intended to force victims to reveal private wallet keys.
The growing value of digital assets has made both large exchanges and ordinary cryptocurrency holders attractive targets. For Binance, which serves hundreds of millions of registered users worldwide, the attack represents one of the most serious security challenges in cryptocurrency history.
Paris judges uphold safeguards requiring transparent negotiations with publishers while the competition inquiry continues A Paris court has rejected Meta’s challenges to emergency measures governing its negotiations with French news publishers. The decision keeps requirements for good-faith talks, greater financial transparency and stable visibility for press content in force while France’s competition authority investigates whether […]
Guardian columnist, senior economics commentator and host of the new Radical Thinking podcast Aditya Chakrabortty answered your questions on the big ideas around economics, society and democracy, and his new podcast
thegreatfatsby asks: Do you think the fact that Gabriel Zucman, who is a recognised authority on wealth tax is given more respect, time and attention by the mainstream media than Gary Stevenson, who has worked eloquently and tirelessly to spread the debate about the terrible consequences of inequality and whose ideas and analysis are almost identical is because of our cultural fixation on class prejudice?
Aditya says: I’ve followed Gabriel Zucman (and Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty) for a long time, and find his work rigorous and thought provoking. I don’t always agree, but I appreciate their acceptance that taxes on wealth are part of the fight against ever-increasing inequality.
I think Gary Stevenson is eloquent and compelling and is fighting a good fight. His book tells a story very well. But I don’t accept the insistence on a ‘wealth tax’ (as opposed to taxes on wealth) as being the only way we fight everything from inequality to the far right. We have to look at workers’ rights, housing, public ownership, greater democracy in economics and politics as well.
In the age of algorithm, simple, strong messages cut through. But the truth is often more complex.
Aditya says: What a nice question, Marija. I try to read a lot and write a diary. Unfortunately, I have the handwriting of a GP so I can’t read old entries. The other thing is I try to shirk my mobile phone.
A North Korea-based cybercrime group appears to be behind a $6.3 billion hack of the cryptocurrency exchange Binance, according to two blockchain intelligence firms. Both TRM Labs and Chainalysis tied the largest crypto hack on record to TraderTraitor, a North Korean hacking unit that has previously targeted the digital asset industry. Billions of dollars’ worth…
A North Korea-based cybercrime group appears to be behind a $6.3 billion hack of the cryptocurrency exchange Binance, according to two blockchain intelligence firms. Both TRM Labs and Chainalysis tied the largest crypto hack on record to TraderTraitor, a North Korean hacking unit that has previously targeted the digital asset industry. Billions of dollars’ worth…
Altering copyright law to allow AI companies to scrape music, books and journalism could trigger a constitutional breach, Coalition senators and the recording industry have warned, as they raise new fears it could open Australia to massive legal action and compensation claims from rights holders worldwide.
The attorney general’s department admitted it was “extremely alive” to the issue, and Australia’s leading constitutional expert, Anne Twomey, agreed there was “potentially” a concern – depending how legislation was drafted – that granting AI companies permission to scrape copyrighted material from the internet could amount to an acquisition of property by the government.
With a contentious midterm election less than a week away, one cause has unified voters and candidates across the political spectrum: slowing down AI.
A friend of mine who directs tens of millions of dollars in midterm election spending says he's never seen voter salience of an issue—AI, broadly—increase so quickly. In July, Gallup found that 39 percent of Americans thought AI does more harm than good, up from 31 percent in 2025. Only 9 percent of Americans, meanwhile, thought the technology did more good than harm (down from 12 percent last year).
Public sentiment has since soured even more. An October ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll found that 57 percent of Americans think AI is bad for society, while a staggering 66 percent said they opposed new data center construction in the United States.
Politicians on the left and right have seized on this political sentiment and offered their own data center stiff-arm policy du jour. However, even a full e-brake on data center construction would do little to stop AI progress.
In August, Arvind Narayanan, director of the Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy and co-author of AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference, claimed that a data center moratorium would basically not slow AI development at all.
Using a back-of-the-envelope calculation, he concluded (under some reasonable assumptions) that a one-year data center moratorium in a "typical U.S. state" would slow down AI progress nationally by only five to 10 hours. Assuming that at least half of data center developers would avoid a moratorium by building their facilities elsewhere, a one-year freeze on construction in larger states like New York would set AI in America back by less than one day, according to Narayanan.
My own modeling of this question reaches essentially the same conclusion as Narayanan's, but rather than assuming computing power will continue growing at its current rate, it treats future growth as dependent on how much computing capacity gets built. I considered three theoretical policy regimes: a full stop on new data center construction and on replacement of depreciated graphics processing units (GPUs); a full stop on new data center construction only; and no restrictions whatsoever.
The point is that, as a federal policy, standing athwart data centers yelling "Stop!" doesn't accomplish the outcomes that moratorium-ites claim to want. And, while some local policies could slightly impede center growth, the only way to hamper the progress of frontier models would be to enact an extremely draconian policy regime—one that goes beyond moratoriums for new data centers and prohibits GPU upgrades in existing facilities—which no one is actually proposing or close to implementing.
What does this all tell us about where advocates of any stripe should put their efforts?
For those in favor of accelerating AI, on the one hand, it provides comfort in that data center construction, even in the extreme, is not a binding constraint to AI advancement. But on the other hand, the political energy currently concentrated on mobilizing the backlash won't stay focused there forever; an issue where more than two-thirds of people are even tangentially opposed to your "side" is not one that easily disappears.
For doomers, it means if the goal is a "pause" of some sort on the ability of AI technology to, say, replace you in your job, targeting data center construction isn't the best way to go about it. It may be a useful galvanizing node in the broader policy fight, but don't expect it to cause any meaningful change in the current trajectory—whatever you believe that to be.
The ineffectiveness of data center moratoriums doesn't make the policy on its own more or less optimal. But if the data center protests are a proxy for broader AI-induced anxiety about large language models crowding out human pursuits, causing unemployment, or destroying the environment, protestors will need to find another leverage point.
Hackers stole $6.3 billion in cryptocurrency from Binance in a record-breaking heist, prompting issuers to freeze roughly half of the stolen assets. The breach, which US analysts suspect was done by North Korean hackers, has shaken confidence in the crypto market.
The race for artificial intelligence (AI), or superintelligence, will be won not just by technology companies, but by the nation that can deliver reliable, affordable and secure electricity. America is in a high-stakes sprint to lead the world in AI. This technology will reshape our economy, strengthen national defense, transform manufacturing and determine which nations lead the next generation of innovation.
But Washington and Silicon Valley cannot afford to ignore a glaring bottleneck: AI runs on electricity. America must dramatically expand its power generation and delivery infrastructure if it hopes to remain the global technology leader.
Data centers are the backbone of this revolution. They require enormous amounts of electricity, reliable grid connections and specialized infrastructure. Without sufficient power, advanced AI systems are little more than expensive hardware waiting for a connection. This creates an immense opportunity for America’s electric utilities. For too long, utilities have been viewed simply as service providers. Today, they are strategic partners in America’s economic competitiveness and national security.
To win the AI race, America must unleash domestic energy production, accelerate infrastructure development, defend against cyber threats and ensure that the private sector — not residential ratepayers — finances this expansion. This is a crucial opportunity for the administration, Congress, state governments and the private sector to coordinate an energy strategy that prioritizes American competitiveness.
Let the private sector finance growth
Electric utilities possess the engineering expertise and operational experience necessary to support data center expansion. They understand regional demand, transmission constraints and the complex mechanics of grid reliability. However, building the necessary infrastructure takes time; new generation facilities, transmission lines and substations often require years of planning, permitting and construction.
Data center developers, meanwhile, want to move quickly to capitalize on the AI boom. To bridge this gap, utilities and developers must collaborate much earlier in the process, aligning construction schedules, forecasting demand and identifying necessary upfront investments. Washington can support this by streamlining permitting and reducing regulatory delays to provide long-term investment certainty.
Crucially, data center developers must bear their fair share of the infrastructure costs driven by their massive electricity demands. Residential customers and small businesses should not subsidize infrastructure built primarily to serve trillion-dollar technology companies. Long-term power purchase agreements, dedicated infrastructure investments and minimum billing commitments can ensure large customers contribute appropriately. This is an argument for responsible, pro-business growth where financial risks are not shifted onto ordinary Americans.
The White House’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge reinforces the principle that America can accelerate AI innovation without forcing ordinary Americans to subsidize Big Tech’s infrastructure demands. Electric utilities can benefit from increased electricity sales, long-term power contracts and investments in generation and grid infrastructure, provided data center developers pay their fair share of the costs.
To protect consumers, we must require transparent cost allocation, enforceable commitments from large data center customers and safeguards preventing residential ratepayers from being left with stranded infrastructure costs if projects are delayed, scaled back or abandoned.
Energy dominance requires real abundance
America cannot achieve energy dominance if it cannot generate enough electricity to power its expanding economy. Meeting this challenge requires an "all-of-the-above" strategy that evaluates energy resources strictly based on reliability, affordability and availability.
Natural gas provides essential dispatchable generation, while nuclear energy offers dependable baseline power with low operational emissions. Hydroelectric power, wind, solar and battery storage all contribute where they make economic sense. Existing coal facilities also remain part of the equation where continued operation is economic and legally compliant.
No single technology can solve every regional power challenge. Utilities need the flexibility to select the optimal resource mix for their customers. The objective is straightforward: build enough reliable generation and transmission capacity to meet rising demand without spiking energy prices. This is vital as data centers increasingly compete for power with manufacturers, hospitals, military bases and households. Energy abundance is a national security imperative.
Securing the grid from cyber threats
There is another critical threat that deserves far more attention: cybersecurity. The electric grid and digital infrastructure are deeply interconnected. Power disruptions halt essential computing services, while software incidents at technology providers can ripple back to affect critical infrastructure. Foreign adversaries and sophisticated cybercriminals understand these critical dependencies.
Electric utilities operate vital infrastructure that must withstand attacks against corporate networks, industrial control systems and substations. Concurrently, data centers face distinct risks involving cloud platforms, software supply chains and third-party vendor access. These are interconnected risks that could have significant national security consequences.
Utilities and data center operators must establish joint incident response plans, conduct realistic multisector exercises and develop secure mechanisms for sharing threat intelligence. Organizations should strengthen network segmentation, multifactor authentication and vulnerability management. In particular, utilities must ensure that a compromise of ordinary corporate IT does not provide a path into operational technology controlling the grid. A stolen password should never become a gateway to disabling the power supply.
Supply-chain security deserves equal focus. Hardware, software and remote maintenance arrangements can introduce vulnerabilities into both utility operations and data center environments. Companies must rigorously assess critical vendors and establish clear protocols for addressing compromised components.
While the federal government has an important role in providing actionable threat intelligence, cybersecurity must not become an excuse for expensive, rigid mandates. Security frameworks should remain risk-based, practical and focused on resilience.
Data centers as grid assets
The relationship between utilities and data centers should not be one-way. With the right investments, large computing facilities can help improve grid flexibility. Some AI training workloads can be shifted to off-peak hours, allowing operators to reduce consumption during periods of high demand.
Furthermore, battery storage and appropriately designed onsite generation can provide grid stability during emergencies, turning data centers into strategic assets that strengthen, rather than strain, America's energy future.
The importance of AI data centers is growing this election cycle as the fight over the infrastructure’s costs and environmental impacts may be threatening Republicans in battleground states like Texas and Ohio. Grassroots movements in rural communities, particularly where President Trump won by double-digit margins in each of his presidential bids, are threatening the rural…
Elon Musk and his business’s role in a recent dispute over Ukraine’s access to Starlink and its military network is putting a spotlight on the tech mogul’s outsized influence on the international stage. Following about 10 days of confusion and finger-pointing over what caused the slowdown of Starlink and its military-grade version — Starshield — in Ukraine, Musk acknowledged his company, SpaceX, was behind the restrictions on Starlink’s…
The importance of AI data centers is growing this election cycle as the fight over the infrastructure’s costs and environmental impacts may be threatening Republicans in battleground states like Texas and Ohio. Grassroots movements in rural communities, particularly where President Trump won by double-digit margins in each of his presidential bids, are threatening the rural…
Login
