A fresh controversy has gripped the decentralised finance (DeFi) sector, as popular bridge protocol Across faces allegations of secretly funnelling $23 million worth of its native ACX tokens to its parent entity, Risk Labs. The accusations, levelled by pseudonymous crypto analyst Ogle, have ignited heated debate over the integrity of governance in decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs).
According to Ogle, wallet addresses linked to the Across team orchestrated two consecutive governance votes that authorised the transfer of $15 million and $7.5 million in ACX tokens directly to Risk Labs. He claimed the moves were “self-serving and opaque,” alleging that the protocol’s governance process is effectively controlled by insiders rather than the broader community.
“This DAO is nothing more than a façade,” Ogle declared, arguing that the votes to reallocate the funds amounted to insiders enriching themselves under the guise of decentralised governance. His allegations have quickly spread across crypto social media channels, fueling suspicion among investors and DAO participants.
Across CEO Fires Back: “Completely False”
In response, Across co-founder and CEO Hart Lambur forcefully rejected Ogle’s claims, calling them “completely false.” Lambur insisted that the funds were reallocated transparently and in full view of the community, with the transfers intended to fund essential protocol upgrades and development work by Risk Labs.
“All governance votes were open and legitimate,” Lambur said. He described the accusations as misleading and questioned Ogle’s credibility, pointing to the commentator’s past involvement in controversy surrounding the TRUMP memecoin. Lambur emphasised that the protocol operates in a transparent manner, with all proposals and voting records available on-chain for anyone to audit.
Binance Listing Sparks Insider Trading Accusation
The situation escalated further when Brian Pellegrino, co-founder of LayerZero, entered the fray with his own explosive allegation. Pellegrino suggested that Lambur had purchased ACX tokens ahead of Across’s listing on Binance, implying potential insider trading.
Lambur swiftly denied the claim, insisting that his team only learned of the Binance listing at the same time as the public. “We had no advance knowledge,” he said, stressing that any ACX purchases made by team members were unrelated to privileged information.
Market Reacts as ACX Slides
The controversy has not been without financial fallout. Following the initial accusations, the ACX token’s price dropped by roughly 10%, reflecting growing investor anxiety about the governance and transparency of Across. While such price volatility is not uncommon in the crypto sector, the incident has raised broader questions about trust in decentralised systems.
Notably, even Ogle admitted uncertainty about some aspects of his findings, acknowledging that while his research indicates troubling patterns, the exact motivations and timing remain difficult to fully verify. Still, he maintained that his revelations highlight the need for greater scrutiny of DAOs claiming to operate on principles of decentralisation.
DeFi’s Governance Paradox
The saga of Across underscores a persistent tension in the DeFi ecosystem: the gap between the ideal of community-led governance and the reality of protocols being steered by a small group of insiders.
While DAOs promise decentralised decision-making, critics argue that insiders often control the largest voting stakes, enabling them to push through proposals that may benefit themselves. This dynamic, they say, undermines both trust and the supposed democratic nature of DAO governance.
The latest allegations against Across have revived this debate, as observers question whether protocols that market themselves as decentralised truly distribute power among token holders or simply mask centralised control structures behind complex governance mechanisms.
A Community Reckoning
As accusations and counter-accusations continue to swirl, the Across community and the broader DeFi space face a reckoning. Will transparency and genuine decentralisation prevail, or will governance remain vulnerable to the influence of well-connected insiders?
For now, both sides are digging in. Ogle insists that his findings expose a critical weakness in how some DeFi projects operate, while Lambur argues that the allegations are baseless and driven by misinformation.
Either way, the dispute has once again put the spotlight on a fundamental question for the crypto industry: can decentralised protocols live up to their ideals, or will they fall prey to the same pitfalls of opacity and self-dealing that plague traditional finance?
As ACX holders and DeFi participants weigh the evidence, the Across saga serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing decentralised governance and the high stakes when billions of dollars are at play.
