THORChain Says It Can't Block North Korean Laundering. Is That True?
Unchained | Oct 07 2026 | 01:11:43
In this spicypost-Bitget hack debate, THORChain co-founder Chad Barraford says the protocol can't block laundering. Taylor Monahan points to the halts it has used before.
========================================================
Thank you to our sponsor!
Visit 1inch.com to swap tokenized securities, crypto and more. Simple. Secure. Self-custodial. Whatever asset you’re buying - swap it at 1inch.com
========================================================
Quick favor: We're deciding what Unchained does next; new shows, stream times, what's worth paying for. Our listener survey takes five minutes, it's anonymous, and I read the write-in answers myself. Everyone who takes it can enter a drawing for a free year of Unchained Premium or Bits + Bips Premium. Open through Sunday, October 18.
— Laura
========================================================
The Bitget hack reignited a fight on crypto Twitter: should chains that can stop North Korea from laundering stolen funds actually do it? THORChain, which DPRK hackers keep using to reach Bitcoin, landed at the center of it.
Chad Barraford, co-founder of THORChain, argues the protocol cannot respond fast enough without redesigning it to be more centralized. Security expert Taylor Monahan counters that THORChain has acted before when its own protocol was at risk, and that routes made up almost entirely of stolen funds could simply be switched off.
Laura Shin presses on the closed-source signing library, four operators running 39 nodes, why validators left after Bybit, ZachXBT's undercover look at a launderer pitching THORChain, Tornado Cash-style legal risk, and fee spikes after the KelpDAO and Bitget hacks.
Barraford's answer to the biggest hypothetical is simple: if enough node operators want to block laundering, it gets blocked.
Host:
Laura Shin, Host / Unchained
Guests:
Taylor Monahan - Security Expert and Co-host of Uneasy Money
Chad Barraford - Co-founder of THORChain
Timestamps
⚖️ 01:56 The Bitget debate: should chains that can block laundering do it?
🧱 04:10 Why Taylor says THORChain has been 'making this excuse' for years
⏸️ 10:48 THORChain paused for 5 weeks for itself. Why not for stolen funds?
🪙 19:15 1inch Aqua: See how LPs can back multiple positions with one token balance at http://unchainedcrypto.com/go/1inch-yt
🏦 20:15 Is THORChain an intermediary? The custody critique of its TSS vaults
🚪 24:32 Why did validators leave after Bybit? Chad and Taylor disagree
🧪 39:36 Does THORChain pass Chad's own decentralization litmus test?
🕵️ 47:59 ZachXBT's undercover probe: a launderer's 'Thor cross-chain' pitch
🏛️ 57:24 Could THORChain face a Tornado Cash-style case? Chad's legal defense
🛡️ 01:05:05 NEAR's Shield stopped $50M in laundering. Could THORChain copy it?
💸 01:05:57 Does THORChain profit from stolen funds? The fee spike debate
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
========================================================
Thank you to our sponsor!
Visit 1inch.com to swap tokenized securities, crypto and more. Simple. Secure. Self-custodial. Whatever asset you’re buying - swap it at 1inch.com
========================================================
Quick favor: We're deciding what Unchained does next; new shows, stream times, what's worth paying for. Our listener survey takes five minutes, it's anonymous, and I read the write-in answers myself. Everyone who takes it can enter a drawing for a free year of Unchained Premium or Bits + Bips Premium. Open through Sunday, October 18.
— Laura
========================================================
The Bitget hack reignited a fight on crypto Twitter: should chains that can stop North Korea from laundering stolen funds actually do it? THORChain, which DPRK hackers keep using to reach Bitcoin, landed at the center of it.
Chad Barraford, co-founder of THORChain, argues the protocol cannot respond fast enough without redesigning it to be more centralized. Security expert Taylor Monahan counters that THORChain has acted before when its own protocol was at risk, and that routes made up almost entirely of stolen funds could simply be switched off.
Laura Shin presses on the closed-source signing library, four operators running 39 nodes, why validators left after Bybit, ZachXBT's undercover look at a launderer pitching THORChain, Tornado Cash-style legal risk, and fee spikes after the KelpDAO and Bitget hacks.
Barraford's answer to the biggest hypothetical is simple: if enough node operators want to block laundering, it gets blocked.
Host:
Laura Shin, Host / Unchained
Guests:
Taylor Monahan - Security Expert and Co-host of Uneasy Money
Chad Barraford - Co-founder of THORChain
Timestamps
⚖️ 01:56 The Bitget debate: should chains that can block laundering do it?
🧱 04:10 Why Taylor says THORChain has been 'making this excuse' for years
⏸️ 10:48 THORChain paused for 5 weeks for itself. Why not for stolen funds?
🪙 19:15 1inch Aqua: See how LPs can back multiple positions with one token balance at http://unchainedcrypto.com/go/1inch-yt
🏦 20:15 Is THORChain an intermediary? The custody critique of its TSS vaults
🚪 24:32 Why did validators leave after Bybit? Chad and Taylor disagree
🧪 39:36 Does THORChain pass Chad's own decentralization litmus test?
🕵️ 47:59 ZachXBT's undercover probe: a launderer's 'Thor cross-chain' pitch
🏛️ 57:24 Could THORChain face a Tornado Cash-style case? Chad's legal defense
🛡️ 01:05:05 NEAR's Shield stopped $50M in laundering. Could THORChain copy it?
💸 01:05:57 Does THORChain profit from stolen funds? The fee spike debate
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices