Darling Circle, the issuer behind the USDC stablecoin, sashays into a fresh Massachusetts lawsuit, all about the Drift Protocol caper that began on April 1 and has refused to be merely a practical joke.
The complaint, penned by the Gibbs Mura team of lawyers, claims Circle possessed both the technical chops and contractual authority to freeze the stolen funds, yet chose to sip tea and pretend the miscreants would simply trip over their own misfortune.
Drift Hack Fallout
According to the filing, the attackers drained an estimated $280-$285 million from the Solana-based exchange in under 12 minutes. The loot then sauntered from Solana to Ethereum over roughly eight hours via Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP).
The transfer, the plaintiffs note, took place during US business hours-a cheeky little reminder that the grand movement and conversion of funds occurred while the matter was still very much in the wings, with Circle making as much fuss as a light breeze.
The breach pulled user funds from trading, lending, and vault deposits across Drift. As the spectacle unfolded, Drift’s total value locked tumbled from about $550 million to under $250 million.
Deposits and withdrawals were suspended indefinitely in the wake of the drama. The impact, the plaintiffs say, extended beyond Drift itself: at least 20 other DeFi protocols reported indirect losses tied to exposure to Drift.
Circle Accused Of Not Freezing Assets
The plaintiffs point to a separate civil matter-nine days before the Drift-related suit-where Circle reportedly froze 16 unrelated business wallets.
That, they contend, demonstrates Circle has the capability-and, in that instance, the willingness-to freeze funds when it pleases.
However, the lawsuit alleges Circle failed to freeze the stolen USDC and other assets that were allegedly converted into USDC after the hack.
Circle is accused of wielding its Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol in a way that allowed attackers to offload up to $230 million onto the Ethereum blockchain.
In the lawsuit’s framing, this is central to why the plaintiffs believe Circle should have acted to prevent the transfers of stolen stablecoins and connected assets during the time the funds were being moved.
Read More
- Bitcoin Surges as Iran Ceasefire News Shakes Oil Markets!
- Silver Rate Forecast
- XRP’s Desperate Dance with Bitcoin: A Tragicomedy in Three Acts
- TRON’s Stablecoin Circus: Ethereum’s Coins Are All In, None Out 🐘💸
- Bitcoin’s Glorious Future According to Hayes
- Circle’s Stablecoin Spell in UAE: ADGM Grants Wizardry License! 🪄🚀
- Coinbase Rejects Senate’s Stablecoin Yield Compromise: Crypto Legislation in Limbo
- Will SIREN Hit $10 by 2030? A Wild Ride Through Meme Coin Mania
- Fed’s Doing “Stealth” Rate Cuts? Bitcoin Bros Go Wild and Larry David Can’t Stand It
- Why Pantera’s $300M Crypto Gamble Might Make You Rich-or Ruin Everything 😅
2026-04-17 01:01