Crypto: A security risk for the United States?

At the heart of a debate as lively as it is surprising, the crypto universe is under the spotlight. The digital revolution and financial freedom collide with national security imperatives. This article boldly and clearly explores the issues related to crypto-friendly regulations and the potential excesses of an exacerbated surveillance state.

The security stakes of crypto regulations

Behind the scenes of power, debates on cryptos take an unexpected turn. Legislators, like Sean Casten, denounce measures they consider too lenient.

Casten claims that crypto-friendly rules could undermine the security of our nation. His sharp and direct statements resonate with both his supporters and detractors.

This is not just an ideological debate. The Illinois congressman points to the relaxation of anti-money laundering laws.

For him, facilitating the use of crypto opens the door to opaque fund transfers and ransomware attacks.

According to him, 100% of these attacks would rely on funding from the crypto world. Accusations that resonate in the corridors of a divided House.

The bill HR 1716, nicknamed “the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act of 2025,” stirs further controversy. Some see it as a step forward for the modernization of the digital economy, while others perceive it as a threat to transaction traceability.

Between economic freedom and national security, legislators find themselves at a crossroads. The tension between supporters of flexible regulation and advocates of strict control has never been so palpable.

The threat of a surveillance state and decentralization

Concerns are not limited to strictly economic debates. Iconic figures, such as Edward Snowden, warn against the emergence of a sprawling surveillance state.

A former NSA collaborator, Snowden describes a situation where the extension of intelligence agencies’ powers could lead to total control of communications. His striking statements remind us that crypto, by offering anonymity, could also serve to conceal illicit financial flows.

Moreover, artificial intelligence complicates the picture. David Holtzman, an expert in decentralized security, emphasizes the need to promote decentralization to counter a dangerous concentration of power.

According to him, an open and distributed system would help limit the risks of abuse while preserving transparency. In this context, the use of blockchain technology appears as a solution to democratize access to data and avoid authoritarian drift.

Finally, the controversy is fueled by divergent voices within Congress. Warren Davidson, a fervent advocate of pro-crypto solutions, harshly criticizes those who advocate for increased surveillance.

For him, facilitating the use of crypto does not mean ceding to a totalitarian model, but rather protecting the principles of freedom enshrined in the American Constitution. This duel of ideas illustrates a broader struggle between digital innovation and state control.

Ultimately, the future of cryptos will depend on the choices we make today. Innovation offers unprecedented perspectives, but it must be regulated to avoid excesses. Between regulatory relaxation and the risk of mass surveillance, the balance remains fragile. The debate is on, and every decision could redefine our relationship with technology and individual freedom.