tl;dr
Garden, a Bitcoin bridging platform, hit a $2 billion in token swaps but faces serious money laundering allegations. Crypto investigator ZachXBT claims 25% more illicit activity on the platform, while Tayvano accused North Korean hackers of using it. Garden has not publicly responded, highlighting r...
**Garden Faces Allegations of Money Laundering Amid $2 Billion Milestone**
Garden, a rising Bitcoin bridging platform, recently celebrated a major milestone: facilitating over $2 billion in token swaps. However, the achievement has been overshadowed by serious allegations of money laundering and ties to illicit activities, sparking a heated debate within the crypto community.
The controversy began when ZachXBT, a prominent crypto investigator, accused Garden of enabling criminal actors to launder funds. According to ZachXBT, 25% more of the platform’s total volume originated from “criminal actors” compared to other projects. He argued that Garden’s centralized structure and recent decision to raise its swap limit to 10 BTC made it a magnet for illicit activity. “Garden is more centralized, and recently raised its swap limit to 10 BTC. This made it more attractive to illicit actors, who allegedly began using it to launder over $1 million at a time,” he wrote. ZachXBT further claimed that the platform profited millions from these activities, refusing to return funds or address the issue.
The allegations took a darker turn when Tayvano, another investigator, suggested that North Korean hackers—linked to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)—were using Garden for money laundering. While she did not provide concrete evidence, she accused Garden of ignoring user safety and compliance concerns. A heated exchange between Tayvano and Garden’s founder, Jaz Gurati, ensued, with Tayvano reportedly telling him to “fuck off” after questioning the company’s priorities.
Garden has not publicly addressed these specific claims, but the accusations have raised questions about the platform’s role in facilitating illicit transactions. ZachXBT, however, emphasized that his criticism of Garden differs from his stance on other projects. He defended decentralized platforms like Tornado Cash and THORChain, which he argued had organic user bases and were not as centralized as Garden.
Despite the scrutiny, the lack of a formal criminal investigation leaves much of the allegations unverified. Community watchdogs like ZachXBT and Tayvano, while vocal, face significant limitations. As the crypto landscape evolves, enforcement agencies struggle to keep pace. The U.S., a key regulatory force, has scaled back its crypto enforcement efforts, while international agencies often require years to investigate complex cases.
This situation highlights a broader challenge in the crypto world: the difficulty of holding platforms accountable when they operate in a regulatory gray area. Even if Garden is indeed profiting from money laundering, grassroots efforts may not be enough to stop it. As one observer noted, “Community backlash might not matter. If Garden really is profiting from money laundering, grassroots support may be irrelevant to its bottom line.”
For now, the allegations against Garden remain unproven, but they underscore the urgent need for clearer regulations and stronger oversight in the crypto industry. As the debate continues, the line between innovation and exploitation grows increasingly blurred, leaving users and regulators to navigate a landscape fraught with uncertainty.