DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 182

Nigeria’s Digital Lending Sector Faces Major Compliance Overhaul as FCCPC Sets January 2026 Deadline

0

The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has issued a firm directive requiring all digital lending operators in Nigeria to fully comply with the Digital, Electronic, Online and Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations, 2025 by Monday, January 5, 2026.

The regulations, which came into effect on July 21, 2025, under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018, are designed to promote transparency, accountability, and fairness in a sector that has seen explosive growth over the past few years.

The move is part of the Commission’s continuing efforts to sanitize a rapidly expanding digital lending space, following years of widespread complaints about unethical practices, such as unauthorized deductions, aggressive loan recovery, harassment of borrowers, and data privacy breaches.

Guidelines to Aid Compliance

To assist operators in aligning with the new rules, the FCCPC has released a supplementary instrument titled Guidelines on the Digital, Electronic, Online and Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Regulations, 2025. Developed under Sections 17 and 163 of the FCCPA, the guidelines provide detailed instructions for digital lenders, including updated versions of Forms 1 and 3 and clear documentation requirements.

The FCCPC noted that the updates were created following feedback from industry stakeholders and that operators with pending submissions could proactively provide additional information as required under the new guidelines, without waiting for a formal request.

Mr. Tunji Bello, Executive Vice Chairman of the FCCPC, emphasized the importance of timely compliance.

“Full compliance is not only a legal requirement but a critical step in protecting consumers and ensuring the sector grows fairly and responsibly. Operators have had ample time to adjust to the regulations, and we now expect all obligations to be met before the deadline,” he said.

Bello added that the Commission would continue to process pending applications transparently and promptly, ensuring no operator is unduly delayed in meeting the new compliance standards.

Enforcement and Penalties

The FCCPC has warned that enforcement actions will commence immediately after January 5, 2026. Digital lenders that fail to comply risk being restricted from operating, while their platform partners or service providers may also be ordered to cease dealings. The Commission clarified that other sanctions provided under the law could be applied to non-compliant operators. All affected entities—including lending platforms, intermediaries, and service partners—are required to meet their compliance obligations by the set deadline.

To facilitate transparency, the Commission has made copies of the Guidelines, Forms, and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) available on its official website, fccpc.gov.ng, and operators can also access information via FCCPC offices nationwide or other official communication channels.

Growth of the Digital Lending Market and Emerging Risks

Nigeria’s digital lending market has grown rapidly in recent years, fueled by a surge in demand for instant credit among consumers often excluded from traditional banking channels. According to Nairametrics, the number of formally approved digital lending firms increased to 425 by May 2025, up from 320 the previous year.

This expansion has provided new avenues for financial inclusion, offering instant credit access to individuals and small businesses. However, the sector’s growth has also exposed significant consumer protection risks, including high interest rates, aggressive debt collection methods, and weak credit control mechanisms.

The FCCPC’s new regulations and guidelines seek to address these challenges by introducing uniform standards for transparency, fair lending, and borrower protection, while ensuring that operators can continue to innovate and provide services responsibly. The directive also signals the Commission’s commitment to strengthening oversight of digital financial services, balancing sector growth with the protection of vulnerable consumers.

This regulatory push reflects a broader trend in Nigeria and across emerging markets, where digital financial services are expanding rapidly, but regulatory frameworks are struggling to keep pace. Now, the FCCPC aims to instill discipline, restore consumer trust, and reduce the prevalence of predatory practices by enforcing compliance with these guidelines.

For operators, the January 2026 deadline is a critical turning point: failure to comply could result in business restrictions or operational sanctions, while timely adherence may enhance credibility with consumers and investors, ensuring long-term sustainability in a highly competitive market.

European Commission Launches Investigation into Google’s “Site Reputation Abuse Policy.”

0

The European Commission has intensified its scrutiny of Google by launching a detailed investigation into the company’s “site reputation abuse policy,” citing concerns that it may adversely affect publishers’ revenue and business operations.

According to the Commission, preliminary findings indicate that Google could be demoting websites and content from news media and other publishers when these sites include content from business partners, potentially impacting a common and legitimate way for publishers to monetize their websites and content.

The inquiry is examining whether the policy infringes on publishers’ freedom to conduct legitimate business, innovate, and collaborate with third-party content providers, raising questions about whether Google’s anti-abuse measures go beyond targeting spam to unintentionally or deliberately penalize lawful business practices.

Google describes the site reputation abuse policy as a measure designed to curb manipulation of search rankings, targeting websites that republish third-party content in an attempt to exploit high-ranking signals without creating original material.

Responding to the Commission’s investigation, Pandu Nayak, chief scientist of Search at Google, argued that the probe is “misguided and risks harming millions of European users.” He emphasized that a similar claim had been dismissed by a German court, which ruled that Google’s anti-spam measures were valid, reasonable, and applied consistently. Nayak added that the policy is essential to fighting deceptive pay-for-play tactics, helping to “level the playing field so that websites using deceptive tactics don’t outrank websites competing on the merits with their own content.”

If the investigation concludes that Google violated the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), Alphabet could face fines of up to 6% of its global annual turnover. For systematic infringements, the Commission could also impose structural remedies, including forced divestitures or restrictions on acquisitions linked to the violation.

This probe is part of a wider EU regulatory effort. In 2023, the European Commission designated Google Search as a “core platform service” under the DMA, granting it expanded powers to oversee the platform. Google is also under separate investigation for alleged self-preferential treatment of its own services, reflecting the EU’s broader push to curb dominance by Big Tech and ensure fair competition in digital markets.

The current investigation mirrors earlier EU actions against major technology companies, particularly in how platform policies can affect competition and publishers’ revenues. For example, the Commission has previously scrutinized Apple and Amazon over their App Store and marketplace policies, focusing on practices that favored their own services or imposed restrictive conditions on third-party businesses. These cases highlight the EU’s broader strategy of regulating core platform services to prevent market distortions and safeguard digital ecosystem fairness.

Similar to these past cases, the Google investigation goes beyond simple antitrust enforcement, aiming to evaluate how algorithmic policies and platform rules can unintentionally suppress innovation and legitimate monetization strategies. This approach signals a new phase in EU tech oversight, where regulators are increasingly considering not only market share but also policy design and its real-world impact on third-party businesses.

The inquiry underscores the challenges of publishers operating in a digital landscape dominated by a few tech giants, where platform rules can directly influence visibility, traffic, and revenue. The EU’s findings could reshape the dynamics between platforms, publishers, and users, potentially setting new precedents for how AI-driven content moderation and ranking policies are regulated across Europe.

Hyperliquid HLP Vault Attack: $4.9M Loss from POPCAT Manipulation

0

Hyperliquid, a leading decentralized perpetuals exchange built on Arbitrum, suffered a coordinated market manipulation attack targeting its community-owned Hyperliquidity Provider (HLP) vault.

The incident, which unfolded over several hours, resulted in approximately $4.9 million in bad debt for the HLP vault, equivalent to about three months of its prior profits. This marks the third such manipulation event against Hyperliquid in 2025, highlighting vulnerabilities in low-liquidity memecoin perpetuals markets.

Blockchain analytics firms like Lookonchain and Arkham Intelligence tracked the attacker’s actions in real-time, revealing a deliberate strategy to exploit Hyperliquid’s liquidation mechanics. Here’s how it played out: Preparation ?13 Hours prior.

The attacker withdrew $3 million in USDC from the centralized exchange OKX and fragmented it across 19 separate Ethereum wallets. This obfuscation tactic distributed the funds to evade easy tracking and simulate organic trading activity.

Building the Trap (?14:45 CET): The funds were bridged into Hyperliquid via the Arbitrum bridge. Using high leverage up to 10x, the attacker opened massive long positions on POPCAT—a volatile Solana-based memecoin perpetual contract—totaling $20–30 million in exposure.

To artificially inflate the price, they placed a $20–30 million “buy wall” pending buy orders at $0.21, creating the illusion of strong demand and pushing POPCAT’s price upward. Once the price hit the target, the attacker abruptly canceled or pulled the buy orders.

This removed the artificial support, causing POPCAT’s price to crash 43% from $0.21 to $0.12 in minutes. The sudden dump triggered cascading liquidations across the platform, totaling $63 million in wiped positions—including the attacker’s own $3 million in collateral, which they intentionally sacrificed.

HLP Absorption: Hyperliquid’s HLP vault acts as a backstop for liquidations, automatically absorbing uncollateralized losses to maintain platform liquidity. In this case, it inherited the attacker’s underwater $28 million long position on POPCAT, leading to a $4.9 million net loss after manual closure by the Hyperliquid team.

The vault was left holding over $25 million in devalued POPCAT tokens temporarily. The attacker did not profit from the scheme; instead, it appears designed as “degen warfare” to inflict maximum damage on the HLP liquidity providers (LPs), who share the bad debt proportionally.

Hyperliquid’s Response: Temporary Pauses HLP Vault Lock

Deposits and withdrawals to the HLP vault were immediately halted to allow manual position closure and prevent further exposure. An automated safety feature triggered a brief lock on the Arbitrum bridge used for Ethereum-Arbitrum transfers to Hyperliquid, suspending platform-wide deposits and withdrawals for about 25 minutes.

Hyperliquid developer “Iliensinc” confirmed in the project’s Discord: “The Arbitrum bridge’s automatic locking was triggered by a conservative set of conditions… Funds are safe. The Hyperliquid blockchain itself was not impacted and experienced no downtime.”

All pauses were lifted shortly after, with trading resuming normally. No user funds were lost beyond the HLP’s bad debt, and the platform’s native token HYPE dipped briefly below $38 before rebounding to $38.80. Hyperliquid has not issued a formal statement directly linking the event to the pauses, but on-chain data and community updates confirm the timeline.

The memecoin itself saw anomalous volatility but recovered partially, as organic spot market bids on Solana provided some floor. However, the incident underscores risks in thin-liquidity perps for memecoins. Liquidity providers in the vault face diluted returns due to the loss. This event echoes prior attacks, like a $12 million unrealized hit from JELLYJELLY manipulation in March 2025.

Hyperliquid remains the top DEX by open interest, but repeated incidents have sparked discussions on X about enhancing anti-manipulation measures, such as tighter leverage caps for low-liquidity pairs or improved oracle feeds.

This attack highlights ongoing “crime season” in DeFi perps, where thin order books and automated liquidations can be weaponized. Hyperliquid users should monitor official channels for any fee adjustments or compensation proposals.

 

 

 

 

OnePlus 15 Offers Groundbreaking Two-Day Battery Life, but U.S. Launch Delayed by Federal Shutdown

0

The OnePlus 15, the latest flagship from Chinese smartphone maker OnePlus, is poised to hit the U.S. market, but buyers will have to wait a little longer. Despite a U.S. price of $899 for the 12GB RAM, 256GB storage model—matching the OnePlus 13—regulatory delays have pushed the launch into uncertainty.

The hold-up comes from the federal government shutdown, which stalled operations at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the agency responsible for certifying devices before they can be sold in the United States. Even with the shutdown now over, OnePlus cautions that the FCC will need time to process a backlog of approvals accumulated during the closure.

Spenser Blank, OnePlus’ head of marketing, explained that the company has completed all required FCC testing at recognized labs and formally submitted its certification application.

“As is the case with every smartphone manufacturer, the United States’ Federal Communications Commission certifies OnePlus devices before they are sold in the U.S. As a result of the government shutdown, device certifications have been delayed… We are hopeful that approvals can be generated quickly and as a result, we can bring the OnePlus 15 to our customers in the U.S. expeditiously,” Blank said, emphasizing that the delay is procedural rather than technical.

Consumers eager for the device can sign up for email alerts at OnePlus.com/us to be notified as soon as sales open. The OnePlus 15 promises one major reason to wait: its exceptional battery life. The device uses silicon-carbon battery technology, a breakthrough embraced by OnePlus’ parent company, Oppo, and other Chinese manufacturers. This technology enables thinner, higher-capacity batteries compared with traditional lithium-ion cells.

While the OnePlus 13 already used silicon-carbon batteries with a 6,000mAh capacity, the OnePlus 15 takes it further with a 7,300mAh battery, offering genuine two-day battery life—a rare feature in the U.S. smartphone market. For users frustrated by daily charging cycles, the 15 promises a transformative improvement, enabling extended use for work, gaming, and media without constant recharging.

The launch delay highlights the complexities of bringing global tech products to the U.S. market, particularly in the wake of government disruptions. FCC certification is a critical step, ensuring devices meet safety and communication standards. While OnePlus has cleared all testing requirements, the final approval stamp remains pending, leaving fans in suspense.

The OnePlus 15 also represents a broader trend among Chinese smartphone manufacturers, who are increasingly investing in advanced battery technology to differentiate their devices in competitive markets. By leveraging silicon-carbon cells, the OnePlus 15 balances capacity, weight, and efficiency, giving it an edge over many current flagship smartphones in the U.S.

For those willing to wait, the phone’s compelling combination of cutting-edge battery technology, robust hardware, and competitive pricing makes the wait worth it.

XRP & Ethereum Prices Struggle While Zero Knowledge Proof Opens Whitelist for a Fairer Launch

0

Among the most popular crypto coins, XRP (XRP) and Ethereum (ETH) have long dominated discussions around network value and transparency. Yet, despite their influence, both face increasing scrutiny over accessibility and fairness in participation.

XRP struggles to sustain momentum near its recurring $0.48 support zone, while Ethereum continues to battle high gas fees and scalability limits despite Layer-2 advances.

Into this conversation steps Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP), a project designed to redefine fair token distribution through an open, on-chain model. Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP) is not live yet, but its architecture represents a credible shift toward equitable access, transparency, and decentralized compute.

XRP : Testing the Limits of Support

XRP remains one of the most popular crypto coins for institutional settlement and cross-border payments, but its recent market behavior has highlighted persistent fragility. Since mid-2025, XRP has tested its $0.48 support zone multiple times, bouncing without convincing follow-through.

Even after Ripple’s 2024 courtroom victories, XRP struggled to reclaim confidence above the $0.55 resistance range. Analysts cite thin liquidity and limited new buyer inflows, suggesting that institutional caution outweighs retail optimism. While the technology behind XRP continues to deliver transaction efficiency, its price trajectory has been less encouraging.

The XRP support zone now functions more as a floor of endurance than a signal of renewed momentum, underscoring how centralized structures and fixed supply allocations can limit decentralized enthusiasm.

Ethereum (ETH): Progress Undone by Pressure

Ethereum, the second-largest among popular crypto coins, remains central to the broader blockchain ecosystem. However, despite impressive Layer-2 rollouts and protocol improvements, Ethereum (ETH) has experienced a 40% retracement, sliding from $3,420 in early 2024 to around $2,050 by late 2025. This Ethereum (ETH) price drop has less to do with lost credibility and more with network fatigue. Gas fees and congestion persist, leaving decentralized finance (DeFi) and gaming developers searching for scalable alternatives.

Even Vitalik Buterin’s efforts to simplify network complexity haven’t solved the underlying accessibility issue. Ethereum still commands massive developer loyalty, yet for retail participants, its cost of entry remains prohibitive. These structural inefficiencies highlight the need for models that remove speculative gatekeeping and restore fairness at the participation level.

Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP): The Transparent Alternative

Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP) enters this conversation with a mission to realign blockchain participation around verifiable transparency and user ownership. While ZKP is not live yet, its foundation has already been built.

The project rejects the closed-door logic of traditional ICOs and IDOs, replacing them with the Initial Coin Auction (ICA), a daily, fully on-chain distribution where contributors receive proportional shares of ZKP coins. This isn’t about private sales or insider access. Every participant joins under identical conditions, ensuring a verifiable record of fairness from the first transaction.

At launch, all elements, from Proof Pod activation to validator rewards and compute participation, will go live simultaneously on Day 1 of the presale auction. Each Proof Pod will perform real AI computation tasks rather than passive staking, creating a network anchored in productivity instead of speculation.

The auction price will set real-time economic balance, linking token value directly to daily contributions and Proof Pod output. For a sector long dominated by pre-mine advantages, Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP) proposes a transparent structure where value is earned, not granted.

This approach challenges the structural inequity visible in older models. Instead of rewarding speed, capital size, or private entry, the ICA model distributes tokens proportionally, 100% on-chain, without gas wars or preferential pricing. Contributors simply deposit supported assets like ETH, USDC, USDT, or BNB and receive their share of that day’s allocation once the auction closes. Every movement is verifiable, aligning ZKP’s utility with its philosophy of decentralized transparency.

Most importantly, the Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP) network aligns compute power with privacy. Proof Pods validate tasks through zero-knowledge technology, ensuring that data remains confidential while computation remains transparent. Ownership of both hardware and rewards rests with the user, reinforcing ZKP’s commitment to compute sovereignty. In essence, the project redefines participation: not as speculation, but as contribution.

While ZKP’s features are not yet active, its whitelist is open now, the key entry point for those who want early access once Day 1 begins. By registering on the whitelist, participants secure their position in a network designed to operate with fairness baked into its code.

Final Say

As the market reassesses what fairness means in the era of popular crypto coins, XRP’s lingering support tests and Ethereum’s prolonged price drop highlight the shortcomings of legacy distribution models. Both illustrate how early advantage and centralization can erode user trust over time. Zero Knowledge Proof (ZKP), by contrast, is preparing to launch a verifiable, transparent ecosystem where users earn their place rather than buy into privilege.

The project is not live yet, but its framework, built around daily auctions, Proof Pods, and decentralized compute, signals a structural evolution in crypto economics. The whitelist is open now, offering early participants a chance to be part of what may become one of the fairest launches in blockchain history.

Find Out More about Zero Knowledge Proof:
Website: https://zkp.com/