Hackers from the DPRK stole more than $6 billion from Binance — this is the largest cryptocurrency theft in history according to the FBI's classification. Almost half of the sum has already been frozen, primarily by companies issuing stablecoins pegged to the US dollar.
Caitlin Long, head of Custodia Bank, is convinced that what happened fundamentally changes the rules of the game in the cryptocurrency market in two directions. First, such cyberattacks now entail direct geopolitical risks. Second, regulators may require developers to embed fund-freezing mechanisms directly into the software code of the tokens themselves.
1. Geopolitical risks of cryptocurrency attacks
The FBI linked the October 29 attack to TraderTraitor — the name the agency uses for the DPRK's state cyberhacking unit. The FBI called on crypto companies to block any funds associated with the group.
Long emphasized that the attack "will inevitably entail major geopolitical consequences." In 2023, the White House cybersecurity official stated that such thefts finance about half of the DPRK's missile program.
The haul from Binance was four times larger than the previous record — Bybit's $1.46 billion loss in 2025. Long called the attack "reaching a new level," noting the simultaneous hacking of Chainalysis, an on-chain analytics service. According to her version, this allowed the freezing of funds to be delayed, though there is no confirmation of this hypothesis yet.
2. Freezing may become part of stablecoin code
Currently, the decision to freeze a stablecoin — a crypto token pegged to the US dollar — depends on the issuing company. Tether blocked 1.18 billion of its USDT tokens 37 minutes after the stolen coins arrived. Circle froze 823 million USDC three minutes later.
Long expects regulators to require embedding the freezing mechanism directly into stablecoin smart contracts.
"The decision will have consequences, because US regulators will want to see the compliance mechanism directly in stablecoin smart contracts, rather than in the operation of a company outside the blockchain, as is currently the case," Long added.
However, the attackers have already found a workaround. According to Chainalysis observations, they transferred some of the stablecoins to a pool on the Tron blockchain, which issued them special tokens — these cannot be frozen by any company.
The capabilities of code are limited. According to Elliptic's estimate, approximately $3.21 billion of the stolen funds is held in Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and other coins that cannot be frozen by any means. The US Senate Banking Committee reported that under the 2025 GENIUS Act, issuers are already required to have the ability to freeze assets on demand.
Cryptalist analysis: The incident is shaping a new regulatory contour in which compliance ceases to be an operational function of the issuer and becomes a property of the protocol. For the market, this means growing institutional pressure on the architecture of stablecoins and a reassessment of decentralization risks — code as an enforcement tool carries both protective and censorial potential.