ZachXBT alleges a custody CEO’s son stole tens of millions in crypto from US government‑linked wallets tied to Bitfinex funds, exposing systemic custody risks. ZachXBT alleges a custody CEO’s son stole tens of millions in crypto from US government‑linked wallets tied to Bitfinex funds, exposing systemic custody risks.

Who Is John Daghita? Inside the US government’s $40M Crypto theft case

ZachXBT alleges a custody CEO’s son stole tens of millions in crypto from US government‑linked wallets tied to Bitfinex funds, exposing systemic custody risks.

Summary
  • ZachXBT claims online persona “Lick,” identified as John Daghita, siphoned tens of millions in crypto from wallets linked to the U.S. government and seized 2016 Bitfinex funds.​
  • On‑chain traces allegedly show about $24.9m leaving a US‑controlled wallet in March 2024, plus earlier activity tied to more than $90m in suspected illicit flows.​
  • The case revives scrutiny of contractor CMDSS and wider federal crypto‑custody controls, even as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana prices trade mostly on macro drivers.

Blockchain sleuth ZachXBT has alleged that a multimillion‑dollar crypto theft from wallets linked to the U.S. government was carried out by the son of a federal crypto‑custody contractor’s CEO, a claim that has not yet been tested in court and has drawn immediate scrutiny across the digital asset industry.

Core allegation

In a detailed thread “documenting [his] findings,” ZachXBT claimed that an online figure known as “Lick,” identified as John Daghita, “siphoned tens of millions of dollars in crypto from wallets linked to the US government.”​

He further alleged that Daghita is the son of Dean Daghita, president and chief executive of Command Services & Support (CMDSS), a Virginia‑based firm contracted by the U.S. Marshals Service to safeguard seized digital assets classified as “Class 2–4” tokens that require bespoke custody solutions.​

Trace from Bitfinex‑linked wallets

According to on‑chain traces cited by ZachXBT, the allegedly compromised funds were linked to assets seized in the 2016 Bitfinex hack, with one wallet receiving “$24.9 million from a US government‑controlled wallet in March 2024.”


The probe builds on an earlier investigation, published January 23, that tied the “Lick” persona to “more than $90 million in suspected illicit crypto activity” routed through a network of addresses associated with government‑linked wallets.​

The Telegram “band‑for‑band” dispute

The investigation reportedly accelerated after a heated Telegram “band‑for‑band” argument in which two individuals tried to one‑up each other by showing control over large balances.

During that exchange, ZachXBT says “Lick” screen‑shared an Exodus wallet showing a Tron address with roughly “$2.3 million,” then executed a live transfer of about “$6.7 million in ether,” ultimately consolidating “approximately $23 million” into a single wallet that could be traced back to the U.S. government address.​

Prior CMDSS scrutiny and systemic risk

CMDSS’s appointment already faced challenge: rival Wave Digital Assets filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office, arguing the firm lacked key registrations and warning of potential conflicts involving a former Marshals Service official, though the GAO later denied the protest.


Separately, a 2025 CoinDesk report found the Marshals Service struggled to reconcile its digital asset holdings, underscoring broader concerns around federal crypto custody as illicit addresses received a record “$154 billion in 2025,” up sharply year‑on‑year.​

Market context and current prices

The alleged breach lands in a market still dominated by Bitcoin, which is trading around 87,700–87,900 dollars today, down roughly 1 percent over the last 24 hours as daily volume hovers in the mid‑40 billion‑dollar range.


Ethereum is changing hands near 3,150–3,200 euros, showing about a 3 percent gain over the past day, while Solana trades around 151 euros after slipping roughly 2 percent over the same period, moves that suggest a market more focused on macro flows than on isolated custody failures—at least for now.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
Federal Reserve Lowers Interest Rates Again

Federal Reserve Lowers Interest Rates Again

The Federal Reserve has made the decision to lower interest rates by 25 basis points, signaling the possibility of further reductions later this year. This move comes as Fed officials appear divided on the future rate path, a divergence not seen in prior economic cycles.Continue Reading:Federal Reserve Lowers Interest Rates Again
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 02:38
XRP ETFs Hit $2B as Institutional Demand Surges

XRP ETFs Hit $2B as Institutional Demand Surges

The post XRP ETFs Hit $2B as Institutional Demand Surges appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Spot XRP ETF Volume Surpasses $2 Billion Amid Growing Institutional
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/27 23:53