ZachXBT Links Govt Crypto Theft to CEO’s Son
Introduction
Generally, I am writing about a very important issue. Obviously, a well known blockchain investigator is saying that the son of a US government crypto custody contractor’s CEO is involved in some bad activities. Apparently, the kid stole a lot of money from federal wallets, and it is connected to the 2016 Bitfinex hack. Currently, the courts have not made a decision yet, but this story is making people worry about how agencies are protecting digital assets.
The Allegations: Who Is Involved?
Normally, I do not like to accuse people without proof, but ZachXBT, a pseudonymous sleuth, is saying that an online figure called “Lick” is the main suspect. Evidently, “Lick” is actually John Daghita, son of Dean Daghita who runs Command Services & Support (CMDSS). Clearly, CMDSS got a US Marshals Service contract in Oct 2024 to handle “Class 2–4” seized crypto, which is not usually on big exchanges. Usually, I would think that a company like CMDSS would be trustworthy, but now I am not so sure.
How the Theft Unfolded
Interestingly, the story gets more complicated after a heated Telegram chat where “Lick” screen-shared an Exodus wallet showing about $2.3 million in Tron. Naturally, this raised some red flags, and then he moved $6.7 million in ETH live. Eventually, roughly $23 million sat in one wallet. Obviously, this is a lot of money, and it is suspicious that it was all in one wallet.
Scrutiny of CMDSS and Government Crypto Custody
Apparently, the accusations against CMDSS are causing some problems for the company. Already, a rival company, Wave Digital Assets, protested the Marshals contract to the GAO, saying CMDSS lacked proper regulations and had conflict-of-interest issues. Fortunately, the GAO did not agree with the protest, but the drama is shining a light on transparency gaps. Generally, I think that transparency is important, especially when it comes to government contracts.
Broader Implications for Crypto Security
Currently, the crypto industry is facing some big challenges. Obviously, if these claims are true, they could have a big impact on the whole industry and push for stricter government oversight. Usually, I would think that government oversight is a good thing, but in this case, it is not clear if it would help. Apparently, the problem is that seized asset management is fragile, especially when third-party contractors are involved.
What Happens Next?
Eventually, we will find out what happens next in this story. Normally, I would expect some kind of investigation or lawsuit, but so far, nothing has happened. Obviously, the company is staying silent, and its website and LinkedIn vanished after the story broke. Generally, I think that this is a bad sign, and it makes me wonder what the company is hiding.
