Wemade Leverages Blockchain to Host Professional Women’s Golf Tournament in Busan

Singapore-regulated Telcoin, a developer of financial applications for mobile users, has successfully restored user balances following an exploit that saw approximately $1.2 million worth of funds transferred from affected accounts.Photo by Martin Sanchez on UnsplashUnauthorized withdrawal of assetsThe incident, which occurred in late December, was attributed to an error in the interaction between Telcoin's digital wallet and a proxy contract on Polygon. In a blog post which was published on Wednesday, the company shared a full post-mortem analysis report which it commissioned Hong Kong-based blockchain security firm BlockSec to carry out, relative to the exploit. The fault in the proxy contract's implementation caused a technical conflict that allowed for the unauthorized withdrawal of assets. Fortunately, no admin keys were compromised, ensuring that the broader Telcoin ecosystem remained unaffected. In response to the security breach, Telcoin took action by immediately freezing the use of its application as a precautionary measure. The team initiated an investigation and committed to releasing updates promptly to address the issue and restore normalcy. The identified address associated with the exploit was 0x35d2775e5f95596509951b140d68fc5b9185ff98. TEL token freefallDespite the initial market turbulence, with the price of the Telcoin (TEL) token plummeting, the cryptocurrency has demonstrated resilience. On Dec. 25, TEL fell from a peak price of $0.00235146 to $0.00122535, representing a 48% decrease. At the time of writing, the price has slightly rebounded, trading at $0.001335. Nevertheless, it's still down 40% over the course of the past month's trading. In a social media direct message to CoinDesk recently, Telcoin's founder and CEO, Paul Neuner, expressed pride in how his team responded to the issue, stating: “Making the decision to preemptively restore affected user wallets from our company treasury was a no-brainer, and I’m proud of the team for making that happen in record time.” Regulatory standingTelcoin's regulatory standing played a crucial role in instilling confidence during this challenging time. Although headquartered in Tokyo, the company is regulated in Singapore as a Major Payment Institution (MPI) by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). The firm is also registered and regulated in other global markets, including Canada and Australia. Telcoin maintains offices in Singapore, Tokyo, Dubai and Los Angeles. The company had been active in trying to shape regulation in the United States in 2023, with company executives having made repeated visits to Washington D.C. to meet with Financial Services Committee members and staffers on Capitol Hill. In April of last year, the company extended its service offering to the European market, starting out initially in Lithuania.It appears that the restoration of Telcoin's application services led to a significant boost in user confidence. The company reported a 400% increase in deposits compared to the previous month. Users responded favorably to Telcoin's swift resolution of the security breach, with a ratio of $3.60 being deposited for every $1 withdrawn in the first day since the service restoration. Telcoin's measures, collaboration with security experts and the surge in user deposits appear to have resulted in a resilient recovery. The saga highlights the importance of prompt and transparent responses in maintaining trust in the face of crypto security issues.  

CoinFLEX’s Creditors Sue CEO and OPNX in Legal DisputeCreditors of Seychelles-incorporated crypto platform CoinFLEX have taken legal action against its CEO, Mark Lamb, alleging that his involvement in launching the claims trading platform OPNX violated his fiduciary duties to CoinFLEX.Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan on UnsplashDissatisfied CoinFLEX creditorsAccording to the civil action, which was filed in a Hong Kong court earlier this month, they view OPNX as a competing business to CoinFLEX. The lawsuit also implicates CoinFLEX investor Roger Ver.Lamb joined forces with Su Zhu and Kyle Davies, the founders of the now-defunct Singaporean crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital (3AC), to introduce a platform for trading bankruptcy claims, initially named GTX (later rebranded as OPNX). CoinFLEX co-founder Sudhu Arumugam also backed the project, with Leslie Lamb, Mark Lamb’s wife, installed as CEO.Lamb and CoinFLEX defended the project, claiming it would enhance transparency in financial markets and benefit CoinFLEX creditors. However, creditors argue that Lamb’s actions indicate a strategic move to distance himself and his associates from CoinFLEX. With that, they’re seeking to prevent him from representing CoinFLEX in the future.Complaint detailsThe creditors of CoinFLEX assert that OPNX was not authorized by CoinFLEX’s board or creditors and that Mark Lamb independently appropriated CoinFLEX’s intellectual property, technology, customer base, and employees to create the claims exchange.They accuse Lamb of entering into a harmful licensing and purchase agreement with OPNX’s parent companies, Open Technologies Holding LTD and Open Technology Markets LTD. Through their lawsuit, the creditors are aiming to nullify these agreements and place OPNX’s assets and profits into a trust.OPNX’s strugglesOPNX has faced difficulties from the point at which it was launched. While Zhu and Davies were once leading figures in the digital assets space, their reputations have been severely tarnished due to the manner of the 3AC collapse and its profound impact on the broader crypto market.In April the platform confirmed backing from various venture capital (VC) entities only for many of the VCs to turn around and deny any such involvement with the project. Having issued an investor and marketplace alert in relation to the firm in April, a short time later the Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority (VARA) in Dubai issued a formal reprimand to the business' founders.VARA followed up in August, applying a $2.7 million fine. OPNX had entered a bid for troubled Singaporean crypto lender Hodlnaut as part of that business restructuring process. The offer was turned down on the basis that the deal involved OPNX’s native OX token, which was deemed to be far too illiquid. A short time later, the OX unit price plummeted.Zhu was arrested in Singapore last month in connection with non-compliance related to 3AC’s bankruptcy, while Davies’ whereabouts remain undisclosed.CoinFLEX’s creditors also accuse Lamb of reaching a settlement agreement with Roger Ver, known as “Bitcoin Jesus.” Ver was one of CoinFLEX’s initial investors but later became entangled in a dispute over an $84 million debt he allegedly incurred on the platform due to market volatility. The lawsuit seeks to recover any benefits Ver received from the settlement.On X, a user called @CoinFLEXReal suggested that it has uncovered evidence that Lamb, Zhu, and Davies “used creditor assets as their personal piggy bank.”

Roger Ver sues Matrixport over frozen crypto fundsRoger Ver, often referred to as “Bitcoin Jesus,” finds himself embroiled in a legal dispute with Jihan Wu, the co-founder and chairman of Matrixport, a Singapore-based digital assets financial services platform.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash$8 million disputeThe crux of the matter is a contentious $8 million that Ver claims Wu withheld from him in connection with the fallout of the unrelated failure of the CoinFLEX crypto platform. This conflict has led to a lawsuit filed by Ver’s counsel in the Seychelles.The legal complaint, which originated last year, revolves around bit.com, a crypto exchange owned by Matrixport, refusing to allow Ver to withdraw his $8 million. Wu, a creditor of CoinFLEX, contends that he incurred financial losses due to the exchange’s restructuring.However, Ver asserts that the insolvency of CoinFLEX, an unrelated entity, should not be tied to the funds owed to him by Matrixport. Off the back of that assertion, Ver confirmed to The Block that in August 2022, he sued Smart Vega Holding Limited, a Seychelles-incorporated subsidiary company of Matrixport, for $8 million.Ver asserts CoinFLEX collapse innocenceRoger Ver maintains that he is not to blame for CoinFLEX’s collapse. He states that the narrative emerged due to breaches of confidentiality regarding the arbitration between CoinFLEX and himself. It emerged last month that creditors of CoinFLEX had taken legal action against its CEO, Mark Lamb, as well as Ver. It’s understood that Ver had benefited from a settlement negotiated with Lamb. Creditors are seeking to recover any benefit realized by Ver as a consequence of this settlement.Ver told Coindesk in an email that he initiated arbitration proceedings against CoinFLEX in June 2022, seeking $200 million in damages. He maintains he was the plaintiff in this case, not CoinFLEX, which later filed a counterclaim for $84 million.Confidentiality is a key aspect of arbitration proceedings, especially in Hong Kong where the arbitration took place. Despite this, it is alleged that Lamb broke this confidentiality, which led to the misrepresentation that CoinFLEX was the plaintiff in the case. Ver firmly believes that CoinFLEX’s insolvency was primarily due to market turmoil in May 2022 and poor risk management on the part of its co-founders.Matrixport standing firmWhile Matrixport does not deny withholding the cryptocurrency from Ver, it argues that Ver should repay his debt to CoinFLEX, which is a creditor of Ver. Once this is done, CoinFLEX will release monies owed to Wu.The dispute also touches on the terms of service. Matrixport maintains that it has the right to withhold funds for penalties related to defaulted margin calls and legal fees and it is committing significant legal resources to defend its position. Ver’s attorney counters this argument, stating that Matrixport’s terms of service do not permit such penalties and that there is no legal justification for withholding the funds.Matrixport claims that the funds are being held because of an investigation into Ver’s “margin trading irregularities.” The company’s Head of Public Relations and Brand, Ross Gan, said that Ver “continues to make unreasonable demands.” Gan added:“We will respect the legal process and the ultimate Court ruling on this case and reserve all our rights to take further legal action in this ongoing dispute with Mr. Ver.”