A Maryland man was sentenced to prison this week for helping IT workers linked to North Korea infiltrate US companies.

This incident fits into a wider pattern in 2025, where insider access and rising crypto theft are becoming key features of North Korea’s cyber strategy. 

US Jobs Opened to North Koreans

The Justice Department announced on Thursday the sentencing of Minh Phuong Ngoc Vong, an American citizen convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Prosecutors proved that Vong used false credentials to secure remote software development jobs for North Korean nationals at 13 American companies.

According to public documents, Vong allowed a foreign operator to use his logins, devices, and identity documents to perform the work remotely. The man, who operated from China, is believed to be from North Korea.

One job created a particular risk when a Virginia technology firm hired Vong for work on a Federal Aviation Administration contract in 2023. 

Maryland Man Sentenced for Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud https://t.co/avJWBhOWVi

— National Security Division, U.S. Dept of Justice (@DOJNatSec) December 4, 2025

The role required US citizenship and granted him a government-issued personal identity verification card. Vong installed remote-access tools on the company laptop. The move allowed the North Korean man to complete the work from abroad inconspicuously.

The company paid Vong more than $28,000, and he sent part of those earnings to his overseas partners. Court filings show he collected over $970,000 across all companies, with most of the work performed by North Korean-linked operatives. Several firms also subcontracted with him for US government agencies, further expanding the exposure.

Vong was sentenced to 15 months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release.

The case comes as North Korea intensifies its global cyber operations. 

Record Year for North Korean Hacks

In October, blockchain analytics firm Elliptic reported that North Korea-linked hackers had stolen over $2 billion in cryptocurrency in 2025. This figure represents the highest annual total ever recorded. 

The overall amount attributed to the regime now surpasses $6 billion. These proceeds are widely believed to support nuclear and missile development.

This year’s surge stemmed from several major incidents, including the $1.46 billion Bybit breach, as well as attacks on LND.fi, WOO X, and Seedify. Analysts have also connected more than 30 other hacks to North Korean groups.

Most breaches in 2025 began with social engineering rather than technical flaws. Hackers relied on impersonation, phishing, and fabricated support outreach to gain wallet access. The trend highlights a growing focus on human weaknesses over code vulnerabilities.

Taken together, these trends suggest a coordinated approach, with North Korea combining insider infiltration with advanced cryptocurrency theft to expand both its income and operational footprint.

The post Maryland Man’s Fraud Conviction Highlights North Korea’s Rising Crypto Threat appeared first on BeInCrypto.

With 2026 on the horizon, uncertainty is mounting over whether the crypto market structure bill will sail through early in the year or become mired in a political fight that pushes its passage further down the calendar.

Key unresolved issues continue to slow momentum, including how the bill should address stablecoin yield, conflict-of-interest language, and the treatment of decentralized finance under federal law.

Path to Senate Vote Uncertain

The CLARITY Act cleared the House in July with broad bipartisan support, marking the strongest move yet toward a federal digital asset framework.

The bill now awaits action in the Senate, where the Banking and Agriculture committees are advancing parallel versions of a market-structure framework. The Senate’s split jurisdiction adds complexity, with the Banking Committee overseeing securities, while the Agriculture Committee handles commodities.

Both committees have now published discussion drafts, but a unified package has yet to emerge. Lawmakers still need to reconcile differences before either committee can send a combined bill to the Senate floor.

One major technical dispute involves how the legislation should treat yield-bearing stablecoins.

Banks Push Broader Yield Restrictions

The GENIUS Act, passed earlier this year, bars permitted stablecoin issuers from paying holders any form of interest or yield. 

However, the restriction is narrowly written. It applies only to direct payments from payment-stablecoin issuers and does not explicitly cover reward programs, third-party yield, or other digital asset structures.

The banks demanded the exclusion for yield-bearing stablecoins in the GENIUS Act. Now they're upset that the language they asked for doesn't screw over stablecoin holders hard enough.

Sorry you guys did a bad job negotiating your regulatory moat. Try lobbying better next time! https://t.co/3BbjUxmZlm

— Jake Chervinsky (@jchervinsky) August 13, 2025

Banking groups argue these gaps could allow workarounds and are urging lawmakers to expand the prohibition in upcoming market structure legislation. They want a broader rule that covers all forms of yield associated with stablecoins. 

Several senators appear open to that approach, giving the issue significant weight in negotiations. Any expansion would influence how stablecoins compete with traditional bank deposits, which remains a central concern for the banking lobby.

Meanwhile, lawmakers remain divided over how the broader framework should address potential conflicts of interest.

Concerns Over Political Influence Intensify

The involvement of US President Donald Trump and his family members in crypto-related projects has prompted renewed scrutiny of potential ethical concerns. 

Some lawmakers, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren, argue that new conflict-of-interest language is necessary to ensure that political figures and their relatives are prohibited from engaging in activities that could raise questions about their influence over digital asset policy.

Such measures would help insulate the legislation from perceptions of political interference.

However, the proposed language does not appear in the House-passed CLARITY Act, nor was it included in earlier Senate drafts. Its absence has become a point of debate, and the disagreement is contributing to ongoing hesitation.

Meanwhile, questions remain regarding how the bill should address decentralized finance (DeFi).

DeFi Oversight Remains Unresolved

The market structure bill is designed for centralized intermediaries, including exchanges, brokers, and custodial platforms. Yet the rapid rise of DeFi introduces questions the Senate has not fully resolved.

First Ken Griffin screwed over Constitution DAO

Now he's coming for DeFi, asking the SEC to treat software developers of decentralized protocols like centralized intermediaries

Bet Citadel has been lobbying behind closed doors on this for years

Okay thats all pretty bad, but… pic.twitter.com/ExoNhbhadu

— Hayden Adams 🦄 (@haydenzadams) December 4, 2025

Current drafts primarily focus on custodial activity. However, some traditional financial institutions are advocating for broader definitions that would classify developers, validators, and other non-custodial actors as regulated intermediaries.

Such an approach would significantly expand federal oversight and reshape the legal environment for open-source development.

Until lawmakers define that boundary, the bill is unlikely to advance. The DeFi question remains one of the key factors shaping when the market structure bill may finally move forward in 2026.

The post What Does the Market Structure Bill ‘CLARITY Act’ Need to Pass in 2026? appeared first on BeInCrypto.