Across Protocol Under Fire: $23M DAO Vote Manipulation & Insider Trading Scandal Exposed

Allegations hit decentralized finance as Across Protocol faces explosive claims of governance manipulation.

Whispers turn to shouts—did insiders game the system for a $23M payday?

Subheader: The DAO Dilemma

When code is law, who polices the lawmakers? Across's token holders cry foul as voting patterns reveal suspiciously perfect timing—just before major treasury movements. Smart contracts don't lie, but transaction histories sometimes tell uncomfortable truths.

Subheader: DeFi's Recurring Nightmare

Another day, another 'decentralized' project showing centralized seams. The $23M question: Was this clever loophole exploitation or old-fashioned front-running with extra steps? Either way, the crypto crowd isn't buying the 'this was just efficient markets' defense.

Closing jab: At least traditional finance wears its corruption openly—DeFi still insists on dressing its power grabs in 'governance tokens' and 'community proposals.'

DAO vote manipulation

The first proposal got a lot of support. It saw 13.1 million tokenholders voting in favor, approving the proposal with over 97% of the vote. 

However, the second, which asked for 50 million ACX tokens to be used as back-dated funding, only got enough votes to pass because of voting by insiders. Analysis shows that a lot of voting power came from wallets linked to Hart Lambur and the Risk Labs team members. This makes it hard to believe that the DAO’s decision-making processes are fair.

“Had the team not voted on this proposal, it wouldn’t have reached quorum, meaning that it wouldn’t have had enough votes to pass at all,” Ogle said. 

According to Ogle, the proposal did not guarantee that the money WOULD be used for Across, and there were no official agreements between the two companies. He also said that a study of the on-chain shows that many members of the Risk Labs team secretly agreed with the plan.

“The second-largest voting wallet in the entire proposal, accounting for almost 14% of the total vote, was initially funded by Hart Lambur,” Ogle said.

In response, Hart Lambur strongly denied any wrongdoing. He pointed out that team members purchased tokens on their own and voted publicly. He disproved claims that voting is hidden by saying that all addresses involved are open to the public.

Hart Lambur also questioned the accuser’s credibility, pointing to potential conflicts of interest given Ogle’s ties to competing projects. However, it has brought an uproar in the community that disagrees with the legal governance process.

The 150 million tokens involved would be worth over $22 million after ACX lost around 9.3% of its value in the last 24 hours to trade at roughly $0.1360 at the time of writing.

Allegation of insider trading before the ACX Binance listing

After that repost, Lambur and Pellegrino got into a public fight because Pellegrino, the founder of LayerZero, said that Lambur may have been dealing with inside information by buying ACX tokens right before a surprise listing on Binance in December 2024.

“I am simply in SHOCK, total SHOCK, that Bryan Pellegrino is accusing me of insider trading when I can prove this is false,” Lambur responded. 

Lambur said that they had no idea Binance would list ACX. They found out on Twitter like everyone else. He said, “It was 2 am in the morning for me when Binance tweeted. Binance will verify this for you. We paid zero listing fee and had zero heads up.”

Pellegrino brought up Across’s recent tweet, in which he talked about months of communication with Binance’s listing team. He also said that most companies limit trading while important listing discussions are underway.

Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More