According to a recent U.S. Department of Justice filing, Hamas’s military wing has been advising donors not to send cryptocurrency directly through Binance. Instead, the filing shows that donors were directed to use a combination of wallets and trading platforms, including Trust Wallet, Bybit, OKX, Kast, and Redotpay, before moving funds to an external TRON wallet.
What the DOJ filing says
The documents describe a more complicated path for moving money from donors to the organization. Rather than using one well-known exchange as the final destination, the filing suggests that donors were encouraged to route digital assets through multiple crypto tools. The end point, according to the filing, was an external TRON wallet.
That kind of structure is significant because it suggests an effort to make the movement of funds less straightforward. In plain terms, the filing points to a process in which crypto assets could move from one service to another before reaching the intended wallet. That layered approach can make it harder for observers, regulators, or law enforcement to trace the full path of the funds.
Why Binance was singled out
Binance is one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges in the world, and it has faced intense scrutiny in recent years over sanctions compliance, anti-money-laundering controls, and its role in global crypto activity. Because of its size and visibility, transfers connected to Binance can be easier to identify, especially when they involve known addresses, flagged accounts, or high-value transactions.
The fact that donors were told to avoid sending crypto directly from Binance suggests that the goal was not simply convenience. It may have been an attempt to reduce exposure to one of the most prominent platforms in the industry. In other words, the filing implies that the military wing wanted to keep the initial transfer away from a major exchange where monitoring and reporting systems are already in place.
The role of wallets and alternative platforms
The filing also names several other tools that donors were reportedly encouraged to use. Trust Wallet is a non-custodial wallet, meaning users control their own private keys. Bybit and OKX are large crypto exchanges that allow users to trade, store, and transfer digital assets. Kast and Redotpay appear in the filing as part of the broader pathway described by U.S. authorities.
By combining wallets and exchanges, the described process creates multiple touchpoints before funds reach the final wallet. This can be useful for people trying to move money discreetly, but it also raises serious concerns for compliance teams and regulators. Each hop in the transaction path can add complexity, and each platform may have its own rules, monitoring systems, and reporting obligations.
Why this matters for crypto compliance
Crypto companies have increasingly come under pressure to strengthen their compliance programs. Exchanges and wallet providers are expected to screen for sanctioned individuals, monitor suspicious activity, and report questionable transactions to authorities. When funds linked to violent groups or terrorist organizations move through the crypto ecosystem, it becomes a major enforcement issue.
The DOJ filing adds another layer to an ongoing debate about how effectively crypto platforms can stop bad actors. On one hand, the technology is transparent: transactions on public blockchains can often be analyzed by investigators and blockchain analytics firms. On the other hand, users can still use multiple wallets, exchanges, and networks to obscure the origin or destination of funds.
This case highlights the challenge of balancing openness with security. Crypto services may want to remain attractive to global users while also meeting legal obligations. But when platforms are used to move funds tied to designated groups, the stakes become much higher.
The broader enforcement picture
The filing fits into a wider trend of U.S. authorities using criminal investigations, sanctions, and asset seizures to target illicit crypto activity. Over the past several years, law enforcement has developed stronger tools for tracing digital assets, partnering with blockchain analytics firms, and pursuing individuals who help move funds for sanctioned groups.
At the same time, the crypto industry continues to evolve. New wallets, decentralized platforms, and cross-border payment tools can make it more difficult to track illicit flows. That means regulators and platforms will likely continue to focus on strengthening know-your-customer rules, transaction monitoring, and cooperation with law enforcement.
Bottom line
The DOJ filing suggests that Hamas’s military wing was not only collecting crypto but also trying to manage how it was sent. By telling donors to avoid Binance and instead use a mix of wallets and exchanges before reaching an external TRON wallet, the group appeared to be seeking a less visible route for moving funds. The case underscores how crypto enforcement is increasingly becoming a focus point for national security, financial compliance, and digital asset regulation.
Related read: Why a Stolen Coin Can Be Returned but a Leaked Identity Cannot: Honeypots, AI Agents, and the New Identity Threat
