There are plenty of ways to capture 3D images or simulations of such if you know what you’re doing with camera hardware and fancy mathematics. However, a little more unusual is the idea of capturing a 3D image while using no lens at all — and yet, [okooptics] has achieved just that!
The basic concept builds on an older project from [okooptics], wherein images were captured from a Raspberry Pi camera with no regular lens element installed. In its place was a thin layer of Scotch tape over the sensor, acting as a diffuser. With the right deconvolution math, it’s possible to actually recover a real image out of the blurry mess this setup initially captures. [okooptics] was then able to push this into three dimensions by weighting the point spread function used to deconvolute the image.
Adding directional bias to the process creates a similar effect to slightly shifting the cameras position, actually revealing a view from a slightly different angle of objects in front of the camera. [okooptics] does a great job of explaining the science behind how this is possible and the practical limitations of the technique, also referencing research papers that have explored these ideas in great depth.
It’s math heavy to extract 3D data from what otherwise looks like blurry nothingness, but it’s possible if you know what you’re doing. For a fuller understanding, it’s worth diving into [okooptics] earlier work in this realm, taking photos with Scotch tape in place of a lens.
You’ve probably seen people committing their env files to GitHub without noticing it. When you’re looking for a job as a coder, that mistake alone is significant enough to get you rejected if it happens during the technical portion. And if it ever happened to you, it’s happened to plenty of others too.
Today we’ll look at TruffleHog. It’s a tool that scans Git repositories and their full history for secrets that got committed by accident. It uses high entropy checks with custom regular expressions to catch strings that look like API keys, tokens, passwords and other sensitive data. You can point it at one repository or use a GitHub or GitLab API to hit a lot of projects in one go.
A developer can delete a key from the latest commit, but it will still live in Git’s past. With those credentials, you access services without making much noise.
Installation
First install git-dumper and TruffleHog. The Python package and the GitHub release are not the same, so pay attention to which one you’re on.
kali > pip3 install git-dumper
kali > pip3 install trufflehog
We’ll use git-dumper when we find an exposed .git directory and then run TruffleHog against that dump. Leaked .git folders are still common.
Dump a Repository
Some servers leave the entire .git directory open. Below you can see a website where it was fully accessible.
Dump it by giving git-dumper the URL and a local folder for the files.
kali > git-dumper http://example.com/.git dump
Other websites block the directory listing but still serve some of the files.
Git-dumper can pull every object, commit and reference it can reach.
kali > git-dumper http://example.com/.git/ dump
Everything will be stored in the dump folder.
Analyzing the Repositories
Once the dump is on disk, run TruffleHog against it. By default it runs entropy-based matching. That can help, but it shouldn’t be the only mode you know. In our case, regex with entropy off gave us more results.
kali > trufflehog --regex --entropy NO dump
In one of the files we found database credentials.
You can also install TruffleHog from the GitHub release and scan the filesystem directly:
kali > curl -sSfL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/trufflesecurity/trufflehog/main/scripts/install.sh | sh -s -- -b /usr/local/bin
kali > trufflehog filesystem /home/kali/Documents/dump
This build is fine for tuning your scans, but it often makes more noise and false positives, so just be aware of it.
Other Ways to Analyze Repositories
Depending on which build you’re using, try these flags to change what you get in the output.
Scan a repo for verified secrets:
kali > trufflehog git https://github.com/trufflesecurity/test_keys --results=verified,unknown
Verified means TruffleHog checked these finding live against the service API (AWS, GitHub and so on). Unknown is both high entropy and regex hits that it couldn’t confirm.
Same scan with JSON output:
kali > trufflehog git https://github.com/trufflesecurity/test_keys --results=verified,unknown --json
Scan a GitHub repo including issues and pull requests:
kali > trufflehog github --repo=https://github.com/trufflesecurity/test_keys --issue-comments --pr-comments
That digs into issues, comments, PR bodies and comments. You can find leaks in discussions too.
Scan a local Git repo:
kali > trufflehog git file://test_keys --results=verified,unknown
Useful when you’ve compromised a dev Linux machine with multiple projects on it. There’s a better chance of finding something locally than pushed to GitHub, although both can happen, as you now know.
Summary
We had an external pentest where several services were accessible but no credentials could be found. Surprisingly, some developers had kept projects they were doing for the company publicly accessible on GitHub. Eventually we found a working pair and got into a database.
TruffleHog can be really helpful here. Sensitive files sometimes get exposed without the publisher even knowing it. We’re humans and we make mistakes. Offensive or defensive, the point is the same.
You can 3D print all kinds of things, from Yoda heads to little models of Pikachu. Eventually, though, most of us get to a point where we want to print something a little more interesting. The lenticular prints developed by MIT CSAIL are very much that. (h/t Core77).
The ShiftLens concept is simple enough—there’s a lens layer printed in transparent material. Beneath that, lives a patterned layer in alternating colors, corresponding with the linear lenses of the layer above. Then, there’s an actuation mechanism that can shift the lens layer relative to the pattern layer. This creates a changing color effect as the mechanism is shifted. The actuation mechanism can be a knob, switch, or roller—anything that moves the layers relative to each other. On its own, it’s a bit of a curio—but there are some fun demos. In particular, using the lenticular printing on a bottle to form an indicator for when the container is closed properly. There isn’t a publicly available design tool for these prints yet, though the team developed one for Rhino that they used internally for the project.
It’s a pretty interesting application of 3D printing, and one that we fully expect a bunch of YouTubers to replicate within the month. We’ve featured some other great print hacks lately, too, like a slicer that lets you print horizontal overhangs without support. Video after the break.
Choosing the right token standard is one of the most important technical decisions in blockchain and token development. A token standard defines how a digital asset behaves, how it interacts with wallets and decentralized applications, how ownership is represented, and how easily it can integrate with exchanges, marketplaces, smart contracts, and other Web3 infrastructure.
The wrong standard can create unnecessary development costs, compatibility problems, limited functionality, or migration challenges later. The right standard, however, can give your project a strong technical foundation and make it easier to scale across wallets, platforms, and blockchain ecosystems.
Whether you are developing a utility token, governance token, stablecoin, security token, NFT, gaming asset, real-world asset token, or a multi-token ecosystem, selecting an appropriate standard should happen before smart contract development begins.
This guide explains how to choose the right token standard for your project, compares the major token standards, and provides a practical framework for making the decision.
What Is a Token Standard?
A token standard is a set of technical rules and functions that define how tokens are created, transferred, managed, and integrated with blockchain applications.
Instead of every project creating completely different token logic, standards provide commonly accepted specifications that developers, wallets, exchanges, marketplaces, and decentralized applications can support.
For example, on Ethereum and Ethereum-compatible networks, ERC-20 is widely used for fungible tokens, while ERC-721 is commonly associated with unique NFTs. ERC-1155 supports multiple token types within a single contract and is useful for gaming and digital asset ecosystems.
Token standards can therefore be viewed as a common language between your token and the broader blockchain ecosystem.
The standard you select depends on several factors, including:
Token type
Fungibility requirements
Transfer requirements
Smart contract functionality
Wallet compatibility
Exchange integration
NFT or gaming requirements
Security requirements
Gas efficiency
Scalability
Multi-token requirements
Regulatory and compliance considerations
Future expansion plans
Why Does Token Standard Selection Matter?
Token standard selection affects much more than the initial token creation process.
A token may need to interact with decentralized exchanges, wallets, staking platforms, lending protocols, NFT marketplaces, bridges, DAOs, payment applications, or enterprise systems. If the selected standard does not support the required functionality, additional development work may be necessary.
For example, a project creating a traditional fungible utility token generally does not need the unique ownership capabilities of an NFT standard. Similarly, an NFT marketplace may require a standard that can represent individually identifiable assets rather than interchangeable units.
Choosing the right token standard can help improve:
Interoperability: Widely adopted standards can make integration with established Web3 infrastructure easier.
Development efficiency: Developers can build on established interfaces instead of designing token functionality from scratch.
Security: Well-established standards have been extensively reviewed, tested, and implemented across the ecosystem, although the specific smart contract still requires professional security review.
User experience: Compatible wallets and applications can recognize and interact with standardized tokens more easily.
Scalability: Some standards are better suited to applications that need to manage large numbers of assets or different token types.
ERC-20: A Standard for Fungible Tokens
ERC-20 is one of the most widely recognized token standards in the Ethereum ecosystem. It is primarily designed for fungible tokens, where every unit is interchangeable with another unit of the same token.
For example, one project token is generally equivalent to another project token of the same type.
ERC-20 is commonly used for:
Utility tokens
Governance tokens
DeFi tokens
Reward tokens
Payment tokens
Stablecoin implementations
DAO tokens
Ecosystem tokens
An ERC-20 token typically includes functions for transferring tokens, checking balances, approving spending, and transferring tokens on behalf of an owner.
When Should You Choose ERC-20?
ERC-20 is generally a strong option when your project requires a standard fungible asset with broad ecosystem compatibility.
If you are launching a DeFi protocol, DAO, Web3 platform, crypto utility token, or blockchain-based rewards system, ERC-20 may be one of the first standards worth evaluating.
However, ERC-20 is not designed to represent inherently unique assets. If every asset needs its own identity, metadata, ownership history, or individual characteristics, an NFT-oriented standard may be more appropriate.
ERC-721: A Standard for Unique NFTs
ERC-721 is designed for non-fungible tokens, meaning each token can represent a distinct digital or physical asset.
Unlike fungible tokens, individual ERC-721 tokens are not necessarily interchangeable because each token can have unique ownership and metadata.
Common applications include:
Digital collectibles
NFT artwork
Virtual land
Digital identities
Event tickets
Gaming assets
Certificates
Membership NFTs
Unique real-world asset representations
For example, a digital artwork collection can use ERC-721 when each NFT represents a unique asset with its own token ID and metadata.
When Should You Choose ERC-721?
Choose an ERC-721-style approach when uniqueness is central to the project.
If Asset #100 and Asset #101 have different characteristics, ownership records, or metadata, a non-fungible token standard may be more suitable than ERC-20.
Its primary limitation is that projects managing large collections of different asset types may benefit from a more flexible multi-token standard.
ERC-1155: Multi-Token Functionality
ERC-1155 was designed to support multiple token types through a single smart contract architecture.
It can represent both fungible and non-fungible assets, making it particularly useful for ecosystems that manage different categories of digital assets.
ERC-1155 is frequently considered for:
Blockchain games
Gaming inventories
Digital collectibles
Metaverse assets
In-game currencies
Multi-asset marketplaces
Loyalty ecosystems
For example, a blockchain game could have a fungible gold currency, limited-edition weapons, collectible characters, and other assets. A multi-token architecture can make managing these different assets more practical.
When Should You Choose ERC-1155?
Consider ERC-1155 when your platform needs to manage multiple token types or large quantities of assets efficiently.
It can be especially valuable when a single application contains both fungible and non-fungible assets.
ERC-777 and Advanced Fungible Token Requirements
ERC-777 was designed to extend the functionality available for fungible tokens and introduce features such as more advanced token handling mechanisms.
However, greater functionality can also introduce additional implementation considerations. Projects should evaluate ecosystem compatibility, security implications, and whether the additional capabilities are actually required.
For many conventional token launches, a simpler and more widely supported fungible token standard may be preferable.
The key lesson is that more features do not automatically mean a better token standard.
Token Standards on Other Blockchain Networks
Ethereum is not the only blockchain ecosystem with token standards.
Different networks use their own technical architectures and token models. For example, ecosystems such as Solana, BNB Chain, Polygon, Avalanche, and other EVM-compatible or non-EVM networks may use different token frameworks.
A project selecting a token standard should therefore begin with the question:
Which blockchain network will host the token?
If the project requires deployment across multiple chains, the architecture becomes more complex. Developers may need to consider bridge infrastructure, wrapped assets, cross-chain messaging, liquidity fragmentation, security assumptions, and token supply synchronization.
A token standard should therefore be selected together with the project’s broader blockchain architecture.
How to Choose the Right Token Standard
Choosing a token standard should be based on the project’s actual requirements rather than popularity alone.
1. Define the Purpose of the Token
Start by clearly defining what the token does.
Is it a:
Utility token?
Governance token?
Payment token?
Stablecoin?
Security token?
NFT?
Gaming asset?
Loyalty token?
RWA token?
Membership token?
A fungible utility token and a unique digital collectible have fundamentally different requirements.
2. Determine Whether the Token Is Fungible
Fungibility is one of the most important selection criteria.
A fungible asset has interchangeable units. For example, one unit of a particular utility token is generally equivalent to another unit.
A non-fungible asset is individually identifiable.
If your project needs identical units, evaluate fungible token standards such as ERC-20.
If each token needs unique identity and metadata, evaluate NFT standards such as ERC-721.
If you need multiple asset types, ERC-1155 may be appropriate.
3. Evaluate Required Smart Contract Features
List every function the token needs before selecting the standard.
Your requirements might include:
Minting
Burning
Pausing
Staking
Token locking
Vesting
Delegation
Governance
Whitelisting
Transfer restrictions
Role-based administration
Supply caps
Automated distribution
Some functions may be implemented around the standard rather than being inherent to it.
This distinction is important because the token standard provides the foundation, while project-specific smart contract logic provides additional functionality.
4. Consider Wallet and Exchange Compatibility
A technically sophisticated token is not useful if your target users cannot easily interact with it.
Evaluate whether your selected standard is supported by the wallets, exchanges, marketplaces, DeFi protocols, and applications relevant to your target market.
Compatibility should be evaluated before deployment rather than after launch.
5. Consider Gas Efficiency
Transaction costs can influence the user experience, especially for gaming, NFT, and high-volume applications.
If your platform requires users to perform many transactions or manage large collections of assets, evaluate how the chosen standard and smart contract architecture affect gas consumption.
Remember that gas efficiency depends not only on the token standard but also on the blockchain network, contract implementation, transaction design, and application architecture.
6. Plan for Scalability
Think beyond the initial token launch.
Your project may eventually add:
NFTs
Staking
Governance
Gaming assets
Rewards
Cross-chain deployment
RWA tokenization
Marketplace functionality
Institutional integrations
The best token standard is one that supports the project’s current requirements while fitting into its long-term architecture.
7. Evaluate Security Requirements
Token standard selection should always be accompanied by smart contract security planning.
A recognized token standard does not automatically make a contract secure.
Projects should consider:
Smart contract audits
Access control
Admin privileges
Upgradeability
Reentrancy protection
Integer and arithmetic safety
Token transfer logic
Minting permissions
Burning permissions
Emergency mechanisms
Oracle dependencies
Cross-chain risks
Independent security audits and professional testing can help identify vulnerabilities before deployment.
This table provides a starting point, but the final decision should be based on technical requirements, ecosystem compatibility, security, and business objectives.
Token Standard vs Token Contract: What Is the Difference?
A token standard defines a common interface and expected behavior.
A token contract is the actual smart contract deployed for your project.
Two projects can use the same token standard but have completely different implementations, permissions, tokenomics, and security characteristics.
For example, two ERC-20 tokens may have different:
Total supplies
Minting mechanisms
Burning mechanisms
Ownership models
Transfer restrictions
Vesting systems
Governance systems
Administrative controls
Therefore, choosing an established standard is only the beginning of token development.
How Token Standards Affect Tokenomics
Tokenomics and token standards should be designed together.
Your token distribution model may include allocations for:
Team
Investors
Community
Treasury
Advisors
Ecosystem rewards
Liquidity
Marketing
Partnerships
The token contract must then support the mechanisms required to distribute and manage those allocations securely.
For example, vesting contracts may control team allocations, while staking contracts may manage ecosystem rewards.
The token standard provides the basic asset interface, while additional contracts can manage sophisticated tokenomics.
A token representing real estate, bonds, commodities, private credit, or other off-chain assets may require ownership restrictions, compliance mechanisms, identity verification, transfer controls, or jurisdiction-specific rules.
Therefore, simply choosing ERC-20 because an RWA token is fungible may not be enough.
RWA projects should evaluate:
Investor eligibility
Transfer restrictions
KYC/AML requirements
Legal ownership structure
Asset custody
Compliance rules
Permissioned transfers
Reporting requirements
On-chain/off-chain data connections
For regulated tokenization projects, legal and compliance professionals should work alongside blockchain developers before the token architecture is finalized.
Common Mistakes When Choosing a Token Standard
One common mistake is choosing a standard simply because it is popular.
Another is selecting a technically complex standard without a real business requirement.
Projects should also avoid:
Ignoring the target blockchain: A token standard must match the technical ecosystem where the asset will operate.
Ignoring integrations: Wallet, exchange, marketplace, and DeFi compatibility should be assessed early.
Underestimating security: Standardized interfaces do not eliminate smart contract vulnerabilities.
Overlooking future requirements: A token may need additional functionality as the project grows.
Mixing tokenomics and technical design too late: Supply, distribution, vesting, and governance requirements can affect contract architecture.
Assuming one standard works for everything: A large Web3 ecosystem may use multiple token standards for different asset classes.
A Practical Decision Framework
A simple decision process can help narrow the options.
If your project requires a fungible utility, governance, payment, or DeFi token, start by evaluating ERC-20 or the equivalent standard on your selected blockchain.
If you are creating unique digital assets or collectibles, evaluate ERC-721 or an equivalent NFT standard.
If your platform manages multiple fungible and non-fungible assets, evaluate ERC-1155 or equivalent multi-token architectures.
If your project involves regulated assets, add compliance and transfer-control requirements to the technical evaluation before selecting the final standard.
For multi-chain projects, evaluate the standards and interoperability mechanisms on every target network rather than assuming that one implementation will translate directly across chains.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the best token standard for a cryptocurrency?
For a conventional fungible cryptocurrency or utility token on Ethereum-compatible infrastructure, ERC-20 is often the starting point. The final choice depends on the project’s functionality, blockchain, integrations, and compliance requirements.
Which token standard is best for NFTs?
ERC-721 is widely used when every NFT needs to be individually identifiable. ERC-1155 can be preferable when a platform needs to manage multiple types of fungible and non-fungible assets.
Can one project use multiple token standards?
Yes. A Web3 ecosystem can use different standards for different asset classes. For example, a project might use a fungible token for governance and ERC-721 or ERC-1155 assets for NFTs or gaming items.
Can I change the token standard after deployment?
Changing a deployed token’s fundamental standard is generally not a simple modification. Depending on the architecture, migration, wrapping, bridging, or deployment of a new contract may be necessary. This is why token architecture should be carefully planned before launch.
Does the token standard determine tokenomics?
No. Token standards define technical behavior and interfaces, while tokenomics determines supply, allocation, distribution, incentives, vesting, and economic mechanisms. However, the two should be designed together.
Is ERC-20 suitable for RWA tokenization?
ERC-20 can be technically suitable for fungible RWA representations, but regulated RWA projects may require additional compliance, identity, transfer restrictions, and permissioning mechanisms. The legal structure must be evaluated alongside the blockchain architecture.
Is an audited token standard automatically secure?
No. A standardized interface does not guarantee that an individual smart contract is secure. Custom contract logic, access controls, upgrade mechanisms, dependencies, and integrations can introduce vulnerabilities. Professional testing and auditing remain important.
Final Thoughts
Choosing the right token standard is a foundational decision in token development. The goal should not be to select the most popular standard but to select the architecture that best matches your asset type, functionality, blockchain ecosystem, security requirements, integrations, and long-term growth strategy.
ERC-20 remains a strong starting point for many fungible token projects, while ERC-721 is well suited to individually identifiable NFTs. ERC-1155 offers flexibility for applications that manage multiple token types, particularly gaming and digital asset ecosystems. Specialized projects may require additional standards, extensions, or custom smart contract architecture.
The most effective approach is to define your business and technical requirements first, compare the available standards, evaluate ecosystem compatibility, assess security and compliance requirements, and then design the token contract and supporting infrastructure.
For businesses planning a crypto token development project, working with an experienced blockchain development team can help reduce architectural mistakes and ensure that the token standard, smart contracts, tokenomics, security model, and deployment strategy work together.
The rise of AI has brought an avalanche of new terms and slang. Here is a glossary with definitions of some of the most important words and phrases you might encounter.
Ethereum Name Service has opened discussion around an ENSv2 migration proposal that would move domain registration and renewal resolution toward a Layer-2 registry model.
The idea is pretty straightforward: ENS works, but Ethereum mainnet fees can make everyday domain actions expensive. Moving more of that activity to Layer 2 could reduce costs while keeping links back to Ethereum’s security model.
This is still an early governance stage.
The proposal is a temp check, not a completed migration. It has not passed a full executable DAO vote, and users should not treat it as already implemented. But it is a meaningful direction for one of Ethereum’s most recognizable identity systems.
For more details, visit the official Discuss platform.
TL;DR
ENS is discussing an ENSv2 migration toward a Layer-2 registry.
The proposal aims to reduce registration and renewal costs.
It is an early governance discussion, not an implemented migration.
Why ENS Needs Lower Costs
ENS is one of Ethereum’s simplest consumer products.
Instead of using long wallet addresses, users can register readable names. That makes wallets easier to share, payments easier to understand, and identity easier to build across apps.
The problem is cost.
When Ethereum mainnet fees rise, simple actions like registering, renewing, or managing names can become annoying or expensive. That limits how broadly ENS can be used, especially for smaller users.
A Layer-2 registry model could help by moving more routine activity onto cheaper infrastructure.
Keeping Ethereum Security In The Picture
The challenge is not just moving to L2.
ENS has to preserve the trust assumptions that made it valuable in the first place. Users want lower fees, but they also want confidence that names remain secure, durable, and connected to Ethereum’s settlement layer.
That is why the proposal matters.
It is trying to find a balance between cheaper user actions and strong security proofs. If that balance works, ENS could become easier to use without losing the trust that comes from being rooted in Ethereum.
Governance Comes First
ENS is governed by a DAO, so major changes need community discussion and approval.
The current proposal is still in the early discussion phase. That means delegates, users, developers, and service providers can debate trade-offs before anything becomes final.
That process may feel slow, but it is important.
Name infrastructure is sensitive. If ENS changes how registration and resolution work, the ecosystem needs time to understand the implications.
Cost Savings Need Careful Wording
The proposal aims to reduce gas costs sharply, but cost-saving claims need to be tied to the final design.
Layer 2s can make transactions much cheaper, but actual savings depend on implementation, network fees, bridging assumptions, proof systems, and how users interact with the new registry.
So the right view is that ENSv2 could significantly reduce costs if adopted and implemented successfully.
It is not a guarantee today.
The Bigger Ethereum Identity Story
ENS has remained one of Ethereum’s most recognizable non-financial protocols.
It is not just about speculation. It is about identity, payments, wallets, websites, and user experience. If ENS can make names cheaper and easier to manage, it could become more useful across the Ethereum ecosystem.
That is why the L2 migration proposal matters.
It shows ENS trying to adapt to where Ethereum is going: a world where mainnet anchors security, while more user activity happens on Layer 2.
The proposal is early, but the direction makes sense.
This article draws on ENS governance materials relating to the ENSv2 Layer-2 registry migration proposal.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
This report is based on information released by Discuss. at Discuss
Kevin Owens, co-founder and CEO of Resect AI. (Resect AI Photo)
Resect AI, an artificial intelligence startup led by a team of scientists and engineers in Washougal, Wash., launched out of stealth Thursday with $25 million in funding to commercialize an open-source technology designed to catch AI hallucinations before they happen.
Unlike traditional AI monitoring tools that evaluate generated text after the fact, Resect AI says its patented technology operates in-stream — looking deep inside large language models in real time to observe, detect, interpret, and modify model behavior before a hallucination can occur.
By intervening directly within the model’s internal decision-making process rather than running post-hoc checks, the platform stops fabrications at the source while simultaneously generating an audit trail for enterprise compliance and due diligence.
“AI has prematurely been put in a position of trust. Adding labels such as ‘use at your own risk’ flies in the face of proper governance or compliance,” Kevin Owens, co-founder and CEO of Resect AI, said in a news release. “We are building the next large enterprise AI company to bring transparency and accountability to AI for industries such as publishing, finance, healthcare, research, and education where factual accuracy is absolutely critical.”
Beyond its tech, the startup’s leadership is also bullish about its small-town presence.
Washougal is a city of roughly 18,000 residents, 175 miles south of Seattle, tucked along the Columbia River across from Portland. Resect AI employs four people at an office on Main Street — including its co-founders — out of a 30-person workforce spread across the Seattle area, California, New York, and Texas.
“We believe the talent is up to par and we loved the sense of community that we found when we first came up here,” Owens told GeekWire. “We have been coming to the greater Washington and Oregon areas on and off over the years and finally decided this needed to be our headquarters.”
Owens said the decision has already paid off, noting that the startup has quickly tapped into the region’s talent pool by recruiting PhDs from both the greater Seattle and Portland markets while connecting with Northwest capital markets leaders.
Resect AI is also planning to open an office in the Seattle area in the near future for engineering and to serve as a business hub.
Alongside Owens, Resect’s other co-founders include Tim Walton, chief artificial intelligence officer; Tyler Gerber, chief operating officer; and Tommy Lofgren, chief product and marketing officer.
The company plans to use the funding to accelerate research and development, expand its go-to-market initiatives, and fuel talent acquisition — bringing its total headcount to 50 by the end of 2026.
Lately we’ve been seeing more reports on attacks against industrial facilities. It’s often the case that the hardware behind these facilities has been vulnerable and overlooked for years. Administrators may know how to set these systems up and keep them running, but they don’t know how to secure them. So many SCADA/ICS/OT systems are reachable from the internet, and basically anyone can interact with them.
There are plenty of tools out there built to test specific functions of SCADA systems, but SCADAver seems to pack a lot more features into just one tool. That’s why we’ll cover it today.
SCADAver
SCADAver is a new tool written in Rust. It came out recently. The tool can discover, fingerprint, enumerate and test systems across common industrial protocols. In one binary you get a CLI interface, a terminal UI and a browser UI.
This project is still experimental. It’s built from public protocol documentation, vulnerability advisories and security research. It works pretty well for assessing device security internally, but you can also use it against devices reachable from the internet, since plenty of them are insecure. And it’s not just active interaction either, SCADAver supports PCAP file analysis too. The tool can also set up a rogue device you can test safely.
Setting Up
We’ll go with the quickest route and just download the compiled version. The developer has it available for Windows, macOS and Linux.
We’ll mainly be using the CLI version throughout the demonstration, though the terminal UI and browser UI will get shown too. The CLI version will probably be the most convenient for a lot of you.
First let’s list the help menu and see what the tool has:
ubuntu > scadaver -h
As you can see, we’ve got commands here. Each command has its own help menu where you’ll find more information on exploits and other flags. You’ll see it later.
Siemens S7 – Basics
Let’s do a basic scan of a Siemens system and see what the tool comes back with.
# a basic scan
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP scan
# a stealthy scan
ubuntu > scadaver -z -i IP scan
It found port 102 open, and it was Siemens indeed.
We can also do a protocol specific scan or point it at a custom port if necessary:
ubuntu > scadaver -z -i IP --protocol siemens scan
# or with a custom port
ubuntu > scadaver -z -p 105 -i IP --protocol siemens scan
Port scanning is also possible. That’ll come in handy when you’re working internally and sweeping networks to find SCADA systems.
ubuntu > scadaver run portscan -i IP
Having covered the basics, we can move on to more interesting stuff and pull some information off this system.
Siemens S7 – Extracting Values
SCADAver can fetch every switch that’s currently on or off on the system. Having a map with human readable labels really helps here, that way you’ll know what each switch is actually responsible for (pump running, valve closed and so on).
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP get io
Say you know a pump is running, now you can find out exactly how it’s supposed to run. We do that with get db, which extracts memory chunks from the device.
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP get db 1 0 64
Here we ask it to open Data Block 1, start at byte 0, and read 64 bytes. Just like with get io, we need a symbol table or the program itself to understand what these values mean. With a symbol table, we’d know that if DB1 holds 1500, the program wants 1500 rpm, for example.
Modbus – Changing Values
We’re not limited to reading only, we can set our own values for registers and coils too. Here are some examples:
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP -p 502 set register 1 1234
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP -p 502 set registers 0 100,200,300,400
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP -p 502 set coil 5 on
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP -p 502 get register 1
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP -p 502 get coil 5 1
Between 2007 and 2010 Stuxnet leaned heavily on a highly sophisticated False Data Injection (FDI) attack to conceal its sabotage. The malware recorded 21 seconds of normal operational sensor readings from the centrifuges and looped that healthy operational data back to the Human Machine Interface (HMI) and the main controller.
We can pull this off too:
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP run fdi --address 100 --value 500 --count 20
With this command we keep writing the same number into one Modbus register, over and over. Many HMIs and programs read that register and trust it blindly. So the screen or the logic keeps seeing 500 even if the real process is doing something else entirely. 500 here could mean 500 rpm, 500 liters, or 50.0°C. Only the map tells you what it’s actually responsible for.
As you know, there can be several PLCs in one cabinet, and you need a way to know which one you’re working with. Schneider’s identify yourself packet (UDP 27127) makes many M340, M580, Quantum and Premium units blink an LED on the panel. It’s a harmless identity check.
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP run flash-led
These SCADA systems often have an HTTP web interface that you can access and interact with. Sometimes, it’s authentication gated and prompts you to enter valid credentials. Here’s another run command that’ll test default credentials against HTTP Basic Auth.
ubuntu > scadaver -i IP run default-creds
More exploits and actions that run has can be seen in the help menu:
ubuntu > scadaver run -h
Another interesting thing you might find is the database knowledge behind researching and exploiting SCADA systems. We listed all of them for Siemens:
ubuntu > scadaver db refs siemens
Browser UI & Terminal UI
In case you don’t like working with the CLI, you can try the other options.
For the Terminal UI run this:
ubuntu > scadaver
And the Browser UI can be set up with this command:
ubuntu > scadaver web
It will be hosted on http://127.0.0.1:8888
Summary
The developer calls it a unified ICS red team multi tool, and it truly is. It’s handy to have all these exploits and recon features packed into one tool that supports so many protocols and products. Obviously it’s still in active development, since it just came out. But even so, you can already put it to use instead of switching between different tools.
We haven’t covered all its features and functions, that would make this far too long. Feel free to experiment with it yourself, since it can even set up a rogue server for you to test against.
If you want to learn how to hack and secure SCADA systems, we invite you to our training led by OccupyTheWeb. It’s available for both beginners and advanced students.
For a crypto exchange, trading fees remain one of the most direct ways to monetize user activity. But simply charging a percentage on every trade is no longer enough to create a differentiated exchange business model. Traders compare fees, liquidity, execution quality, rewards, supported assets, and platform benefits before deciding where to trade.
This is where an exchange token can become strategically important.
An exchange token is a native crypto asset designed to provide utility within an exchange ecosystem. Depending on its architecture, it can be used for trading-fee discounts, staking, loyalty programs, governance, launchpad access, liquidity incentives, payments, and other platform functions.
The most important opportunity is the relationship between the token and trading activity. A carefully designed exchange token can encourage users to hold the asset, pay fees through it, trade more frequently, participate in platform programs, and remain within the exchange ecosystem.
Binance, for example, allows users to use BNB for trading fees and offers discounts based on BNB usage and account tiers. Its current fee structure also uses the maker-taker model and volume-based VIP tiers. WhiteBIT’s WBT similarly combines exchange fee benefits with broader ecosystem utility, including trading-fee reductions and other platform functions.
For businesses planning to launch their own crypto exchange, understanding this model can help them design a token that supports both user acquisition and sustainable platform economics.
What Is an Exchange Token?
An exchange token is a cryptocurrency created or adopted by a crypto exchange to provide utility within its ecosystem.
Unlike a token that exists solely as a speculative asset, an exchange token can be integrated directly into the platform’s products and user experience.
Common utilities include:
Trading-fee discounts
VIP membership tiers
Staking
Loyalty rewards
Launchpad participation
Liquidity incentives
Governance
Referral rewards
Token payments
Access to premium features
Blockchain transaction fees
The strongest exchange token models connect these utilities with measurable platform activity.
For example, an exchange could design a system where users who hold a specific amount of the native token qualify for lower trading fees. Those users have an incentive to acquire and retain the token, while the exchange can use the token to encourage greater trading activity and customer retention.
The exact economics depend on the exchange’s business model and regulatory structure.
How Trading Fees Generate Exchange Revenue
Before understanding the role of an exchange token, it is important to understand the basic trading-fee model.
Suppose an exchange charges a 0.10% trading fee.
A trader executes a $100,000 transaction.
The basic fee would be:
$100,000 × 0.10% = $100
If the exchange processes $100 million of trading volume at an average effective fee rate of 0.10%, the gross trading-fee revenue would be:
$100 million × 0.10% = $100,000
In practice, exchanges often have different maker and taker rates, volume tiers, promotions, institutional pricing, liquidity incentives, and product-specific fee schedules.
Binance currently describes a maker-taker structure where fees vary according to whether an order adds or removes liquidity, while user tiers and BNB usage can affect the applicable fee.
This creates an important design challenge:
How can an exchange reduce the fee burden for valuable users without destroying its own revenue?
An exchange token can become part of the answer.
How Exchange Tokens Can Drive Trading Fee Revenue
The key is not simply giving users discounts.
The real objective is to use token utility to influence behavior that contributes to the exchange’s overall economics.
1. Encourage Users to Trade More Frequently
Trading-fee discounts can make an exchange more attractive to active traders.
Consider two platforms with similar liquidity and trading pairs.
Exchange A charges a standard 0.10% fee.
Exchange B offers eligible users a lower effective fee when they use or hold its native token.
A high-frequency trader may prefer Exchange B because lower costs can improve the economics of repeated trading.
The exchange may collect less revenue per individual transaction, but potentially gain greater total volume.
This creates the central principle of exchange-token economics:
Lower effective fees can potentially increase trading volume enough to offset the reduction in fee rate.
The outcome is not guaranteed. The exchange needs to model elasticity between fee reductions, user activity, retention, and total volume.
2. Create Token-Based Trading Fee Discounts
One of the most established exchange-token utilities is fee payment or fee discounts.
The platform may apply a discount to users who choose this option.
This creates recurring utility for the token.
Instead of users purchasing the token only once, active traders may need to maintain a balance to continue receiving the benefit.
That can create recurring transactional demand tied to platform activity.
The model is already used by major exchanges. Binance currently allows users to pay trading fees with BNB and provides a corresponding discount under its published rules.
5. Create Token-Based VIP Membership
An exchange token can also become the foundation of a VIP program.
Instead of paying a traditional subscription fee, users could qualify for premium exchange benefits by holding or staking a defined amount of the native token.
Potential benefits include:
Lower trading fees
Higher API limits
Advanced trading tools
Increased withdrawal limits, subject to applicable rules
Priority customer support
Early access to new products
Launchpad access
Enhanced rewards
This changes the token from a simple discount instrument into a membership asset.
The exchange benefits because the token becomes embedded into the customer-retention strategy.
6. Use Staking to Reduce Token Selling Pressure
Another potential model is exchange-token staking.
Users lock their tokens for a specific period and receive platform benefits.
The staking mechanism can also provide access to exchange programs or other utility features.
However, staking should be designed carefully. Businesses should not automatically market staking as an investment return mechanism without considering the applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
From a product perspective, staking can nevertheless create an additional reason for users to hold the token rather than immediately selling it.
7. Link Tokens to Launchpad Participation
Exchange tokens can support token-launch platforms.
A crypto exchange may allow users to hold or stake its native token to qualify for selected token sales or launchpad allocations.
This can create a second utility loop:
Hold exchange token → Access launchpad → Discover new projects → Continue using exchange
Binance’s Launchpool and Launchpad ecosystem demonstrates how native-asset participation can be connected with new-token distribution and user activity.
For a startup exchange, a launchpad can therefore become another reason for customers to maintain native-token balances.
8. Use the Token to Support Liquidity Programs
Liquidity is one of the most important competitive factors for an exchange.
A platform with poor liquidity can experience:
Wider spreads
Greater slippage
Poor execution
Lower trader satisfaction
Lower trading volume
Exchange tokens can potentially be incorporated into liquidity incentives.
For example, market makers or liquidity providers could receive native-token rewards based on qualifying activity.
This can help an exchange attract liquidity during its growth phase.
Coinbase currently operates liquidity programs where qualifying clients can receive benefits through fee tiers and incentives related to liquidity provision and trading activity.
A startup exchange can use similar economic principles while designing its own token-based incentive structure.
9. Connect Token Utility With Trading Volume
One of the most important concepts in exchange-token design is creating a relationship between token utility and measurable platform activity.
Consider this simplified model:
More token utility
→ More users hold token
→ More users participate in exchange programs
→ Higher user retention
→ Greater trading activity
→ More gross trading-fee opportunities
The token therefore becomes part of the exchange’s growth engine.
However, the relationship should be modeled carefully.
More trading volume does not automatically mean more profit.
An exchange needs to consider:
Effective fee rate
Liquidity incentives
Market-making costs
Infrastructure costs
Compliance expenses
Customer acquisition costs
Promotional discounts
Token incentives
The objective should be sustainable trading economics, not simply maximum volume.
10. Design Referral Programs Around the Token
Exchange tokens can also be integrated into referral systems.
Instead of giving every referral a simple cash reward, an exchange could use its token as one component of the incentive structure.
For example:
Existing user refers trader → New user completes qualifying activity → Referrer receives token-based reward
The token can then encourage the existing customer to remain active within the ecosystem.
This creates another behavioral loop:
Referral → New user → Trading activity → Token reward → Retention
Such programs need appropriate controls to prevent wash trading, fake accounts, sybil behavior, and incentive abuse.
11. Use Buyback Mechanisms Carefully
Some exchange ecosystems use platform economics to support token buybacks.
A simplified model could involve allocating a defined portion of platform-generated funds toward token purchases according to disclosed rules.
The purchased tokens may then be:
Held by the treasury
Burned
Used for ecosystem programs
Allocated according to governance rules
The economic effect depends heavily on the specific structure.
Hyperliquid provides a current example of a different model in which eligible protocol fees are systematically routed toward HYPE buybacks, according to Coinbase Institutional’s March 2026 analysis. Coinbase also notes that token monetization depends on factors such as fee mix and the relationship between fees and buyback activity.
This is an important lesson for exchange founders:
A token should not be designed around a buyback narrative alone.
The underlying exchange needs strong product-market fit and sustainable fee economics.
12. Expand Token Utility Beyond Trading
The strongest exchange tokens can become broader ecosystem assets.
For example, WhiteBIT’s WBT is positioned not only around exchange benefits but also as the gas token for Whitechain, alongside other platform utilities.
The more genuine utility a token has, the less dependent its ecosystem role may be on one feature.
Exchange Token Revenue Model Example
Consider a hypothetical crypto exchange.
Suppose the platform generates:
$500 million monthly trading volume
and has an average effective fee rate of:
0.08%
Estimated gross trading-fee revenue:
$500,000,000 × 0.0008 = $400,000
Now suppose the exchange launches a native token and offers eligible users a 20% effective fee reduction.
If the reduced fees were applied across the entire volume, the simple revenue calculation would become:
$400,000 × 80% = $320,000
At first glance, this appears negative.
But suppose the token program increases monthly trading volume from $500 million to $700 million.
The resulting revenue at the same reduced effective rate would be:
$700,000,000 × 0.00064 = $448,000
The hypothetical exchange would therefore generate more gross trading-fee revenue despite offering a discount.
This example is purely illustrative. Real-world results depend on user behavior, liquidity, market conditions, fee structures, incentives, and operating costs.
The lesson is important:
The goal is not the maximum fee percentage. The goal is sustainable revenue generated from healthy platform activity.
Key Metrics to Track
A token-based exchange revenue strategy should be measured using more than token price.
Important metrics include:
Trading Volume
How much trading activity does the platform process?
Effective Take Rate
What percentage of trading volume becomes actual fee revenue after discounts and incentives?
Token Adoption
What percentage of active traders hold or use the native token?
Fee Payment Ratio
How many users actually use the token for fee payment?
Retention
Do token holders remain active on the exchange longer?
Average Revenue Per User
Does token adoption improve the economics of each customer?
Trading Frequency
Are token users trading more frequently than non-token users?
Liquidity
Does the token incentive structure improve order-book depth and execution?
Incentive Cost
How much does the exchange spend in token rewards to generate each dollar of incremental activity?
Token Velocity
How quickly do users acquire and dispose of the token?
These metrics provide a much clearer picture than token market capitalization alone.
Common Mistakes in Exchange Token Development
Offering Excessive Fee Discounts
A 90% or 100% discount may attract attention, but it can create serious revenue pressure.
Discounts should be modeled against expected trading-volume growth.
Creating Token Utility That Nobody Needs
A token should solve a real platform problem.
Simply adding “governance” or “staking” to a token whitepaper does not automatically create meaningful demand.
Ignoring Liquidity
A token can have strong utility but poor market liquidity.
Exchange founders need to plan liquidity from the beginning.
Over-Relying on Token Price Appreciation
The business model should not depend on users believing that the token price will rise.
The stronger foundation is actual platform utility.
Poor Supply Design
Large unlocks, uncontrolled emissions, or excessive rewards can negatively affect token economics.
Token supply should be modeled alongside the exchange’s expected growth.
Ignoring Regulatory Requirements
The legal classification and treatment of an exchange token can vary by jurisdiction and structure.
Businesses should obtain qualified legal advice before launch, particularly when token benefits involve revenue sharing, buybacks, staking returns, or investment-like characteristics.
How to Build an Exchange Token
A business planning to develop a native exchange token should begin with the exchange’s commercial model rather than the smart contract.
Smart contracts, token permissions, staking systems and exchange integrations should undergo appropriate security testing and independent auditing.
Step 7: Launch and Optimize
After launch, monitor user behavior and adjust the token utility and fee structure based on measurable business performance.
The Future of Exchange Token Economics
Exchange tokens are evolving beyond simple fee-discount instruments.
The next generation is likely to combine multiple functions across trading platforms, blockchain networks, payment systems, loyalty programs, launchpads, liquidity infrastructure and Web3 applications.
The broader exchange industry is also diversifying its revenue sources. Coinbase reported in July 2026 that 88% of its net revenue was from non-Bitcoin spot trading, illustrating how major crypto platforms are expanding beyond dependence on a single trading category.
This creates an important opportunity for exchange founders.
Instead of building a token whose only purpose is:
The token then becomes part of the exchange’s infrastructure rather than merely a marketing asset.
Final Thoughts
A well-designed exchange token can influence trading behavior, strengthen customer retention, create additional utility, support liquidity programs, and potentially contribute to higher trading activity.
But the most important lesson is that token utility and exchange revenue must be designed together.
A fee discount by itself does not guarantee higher revenue. A staking program does not automatically create sustainable demand. A buyback mechanism does not replace product-market fit.
The strongest approach is to model the entire system:
For startups and business owners planning their own crypto exchange, this makes exchange token development a strategic product decision rather than simply a smart-contract development task.
A professionally designed native token can become the economic layer connecting the exchange’s users, trading infrastructure, liquidity programs, rewards, and broader Web3 ecosystem.
Login
