Blockchain technology is being pulled in sharply different directions. Circle is expanding its institutional intellectual-property arsenal, Ondo is reconsidering what onchain financial infrastructure should look like, and cybercriminals are using decentralised naming systems to make botnets harder to disrupt. Elsewhere, a tokenised-cattle story is facing scrutiny, while a former Web3 game has removed blockchain entirely to pursue a more conventional future on Steam.
Dysphoria botnet adopts blockchain-based command infrastructure
The Dysphoria Internet of Things botnet has incorporated blockchain-based name services and compromised-device relays into its command-and-control infrastructure.
According to The Hacker News, the change followed a coordinated law-enforcement operation targeting the infrastructure of JackSkid and several other IoT botnets in March 2026. Shortly after that disruption, the operators began using an Ethereum Name Service domain to locate command servers.
Researchers later identified infrastructure records stored through both Ethereum Name Service and Solana Name Service. Instead of connecting directly to the real controllers, infected devices retrieve server information from distribution nodes and route traffic through other compromised machines.
This creates additional layers between the botnet and its operators, complicating traditional takedowns based on seizing a central server or suspending a conventional domain. However, it does not make the system completely decentralised: Dysphoria still depends on accessible blockchain records, distribution servers and infected relays.
CNCERT and XLab have estimated that the botnet population exceeds 200,000 devices, although The Hacker News cautions that the figures have not been independently reproduced and should not be treated as an exact census.
The botnet reportedly spreads through weak Telnet and SSH credentials as well as known vulnerabilities affecting routers, cameras and gateways. Its evolution illustrates the dual-use character of decentralised infrastructure. Blockchain naming services can improve censorship resistance for legitimate applications, but those same properties can help malicious operators recover after infrastructure seizures.
Circle acquires nearly 1,000 IBM blockchain patents
Circle Internet Group has acquired a significant part of IBM’s blockchain patent portfolio, strengthening its intellectual-property position around stablecoins and onchain financial infrastructure.
The transaction covers more than 680 patent families and almost 1,000 issued patents worldwide, according to Circle’s announcement. The portfolio spans blockchain technology, banking, insurance, financial services, enterprise infrastructure, supply-chain verification and secure cloud operations.
Circle says the acquisition makes it the largest blockchain patent holder in the United States. The company intends to use the portfolio to support USDC, Circle Payments Network, its Arc enterprise blockchain and a growing range of onchain and agent-driven financial products. Circle and IBM also plan to explore further commercial opportunities.
The acquisition is strategically important beyond the number of patents involved. As stablecoins move deeper into payments, treasury management and institutional finance, intellectual property could become a more influential competitive asset. It can protect proprietary infrastructure, strengthen negotiating power in commercial partnerships and create defensive leverage against future patent disputes.
Circle is consequently positioning itself not only as a stablecoin issuer but as a broader infrastructure company serving the emerging internet-native financial system. Its expanded portfolio also underlines the increasing convergence between traditional enterprise technology and programmable blockchain finance.
For additional context on the institutional adoption of tokenised assets, see HIPTHER’s earlier coverage of tradable stocks and bonds moving onchain.
Tokenised cattle story faces questions over its real-world value
A widely shared story about a Brazilian rancher using ten tokenised cows to secure a loan of approximately $19,700 is facing criticism over whether blockchain provided any meaningful benefit.
Protos reports that much of the initial coverage presented the transaction as a financial breakthrough for an underserved farmer. However, the rancher involved reportedly operates a large, multigenerational property with hundreds of cattle and access to traditional real-estate-backed financing.
The transaction was structured by agricultural technology company Cowmed alongside a receivables investment fund. Electronic collars were used to identify the cattle supporting the credit note, while tokenisation created digital representations of the collateral.
Protos argues that the arrangement still depends on trust in the rancher, tracking provider, tokenisation company and lender. It also notes that livestock has long been used as loan collateral and that wireless cattle tracking predates blockchain adoption.
The criticism does not mean tokenised agricultural collateral can never provide value. Digital records could potentially improve auditability, transferability and coordination between lenders, insurers and supply-chain participants. But the technology must solve a problem more effectively than a conventional database.
The episode provides a useful warning for the real-world asset sector: a token should not automatically be considered transformative merely because it represents a physical asset. Adoption depends on credible custody, enforceable legal rights, reliable data and a clear explanation of why distributed infrastructure is necessary.
HIPTHER has previously examined more established asset-backed use cases through its coverage of tokenised gold and the expansion of onchain real-world assets.
Soulbound relaunches without the blockchain
Soulbound: Online has entered Steam Early Access as a blockchain-free relaunch of Worldwide Webb, the former Web3 MMO that incorporated NFTs and attracted a $10 million investment led by Pantera Capital.
The new title from London-based studio Spiderware is a pixel-art action roguelite with an MMO overworld. It combines cooperative dungeons, raids and character progression with crafting, trading, farming and player-owned home bases.
According to GameDaily, Spiderware removed blockchain integrations after encountering scalability and distribution limitations. The studio wiped the previous progression, rebuilt the project as a conventional paid PC game and says future monetisation will focus on cosmetics and a possible premium subscription rather than pay-to-win mechanics.
The decision has generated a mixed response. Some former NFT holders have criticised the removal of blockchain features and the loss of their previous progression, while the developer views the relaunch as an opportunity to reach a broader audience and design the game around its gameplay rather than its token economy.
Soulbound offers an instructive case study for blockchain gaming. Web3 components can support ownership, trading and community participation, but they can also create technical friction and complex obligations to early asset holders. Removing blockchain may simplify distribution through platforms such as Steam, although it cannot erase the expectations created during the project’s NFT phase.
The transition suggests that sustainable blockchain gaming ultimately depends on whether the technology improves the player experience. If a game functions better without tokens or NFTs, its developers may decide that conventional digital ownership systems are sufficient.
Ondo separates execution from blockchain settlement
Ondo Finance has introduced the Ondo Network, a financial execution environment designed to provide near-centralised-exchange speed and privacy while retaining verifiability and non-custodial control.
The first application running on the network is Ondo Perps, a perpetual-futures platform offering access to tokenised real-world assets as collateral. However, Ondo makes an important distinction: the network is not currently a blockchain in the traditional sense.
As explained in the Ondo Finance announcement, the company initially planned to build Ondo Chain. During development, it concluded that financial applications do not necessarily need execution, verification and settlement to happen on the same public ledger.
Ondo Network therefore separates these functions. Application logic runs privately inside trusted execution environments, or secure hardware enclaves, at speeds closer to a centralised exchange. A distributed group of attestors verifies that the enclaves are running approved code and collectively controls the cryptographic keys required for the system to operate.
Asset transfers settle on public blockchains, while signed execution logs allow authorised parties to confirm that transactions followed the approved rules. Ondo says this structure can protect sensitive information such as positions and order flow without requiring users to surrender control of their assets to a central operator.
The architecture is already live with multiple attestors, although code execution currently occurs inside a single high-performance enclave. Future possibilities include a permissionless attestor set, external network watchers, onchain state commitments, additional cryptographic proofs and a proof-of-stake security model.
Ondo’s approach reflects a wider shift in blockchain architecture. Rather than insisting that every operation happen onchain, developers are separating execution from settlement and asking which properties genuinely require decentralisation. The result may increasingly resemble a spectrum of verifiable networks rather than a simple division between blockchains and centralised platforms.
The bigger picture: blockchain must prove its purpose
Today’s stories highlight one of the industry’s most important questions: where does blockchain create genuine value, and where does it merely add complexity?
Dysphoria demonstrates how decentralised infrastructure can improve resilience for malicious actors. Circle’s patent acquisition shows that blockchain finance is becoming an institutional and intellectual-property contest. The tokenised-cattle controversy warns against confusing digital representation with meaningful innovation, while Soulbound’s relaunch shows that removing blockchain can sometimes be a product decision rather than a technological retreat.
Ondo’s new network offers perhaps the clearest indication of where the market is heading. The future of onchain finance may not require every process to occur on a public blockchain. Instead, execution, privacy, verification and settlement could be distributed across different layers, with blockchain used where its immutability and trust-minimisation deliver measurable benefits.
The industry’s next stage will be defined less by how frequently the word “blockchain” appears in a product description and more by whether the underlying architecture solves a real problem.
