Across Scandal Exposed: DAO Funds Suspected of Being Manipulated and Misappropriated

The cross-chain bridge protocol Across has recently been embroiled in a scandal. A project founder named Ogle publicly accused the Across team of manipulating DAO votes and misappropriating up to $23 million in funds. This accusation has not only attracted widespread attention from the community but has also once again brought the issues of transparency and security in DAO governance mechanisms to the forefront.

Across is a cross-chain bridge protocol dedicated to achieving seamless asset transfers between different blockchains. The project previously secured $10 million in funding at the end of 2022 and announced a fundraising of $41 million in March 2025, with a lineup of investors that is quite impressive. Its founding team members have previously worked on well-known projects such as UMA and Risk Labs.

Across adopts a DAO governance model, allowing users with governance tokens to participate in proposal voting, determining the allocation of funds and the development direction of the protocol. However, Ogle's allegations reveal serious vulnerabilities that may exist in this governance model.

According to Ogle, the Across team is suspected of manipulating DAO votes in the following ways:

1. Use the large governance tokens held to dominate the voting results.
2. Create the illusion of community support by centralizing votes through multiple associated wallets.
3. Transferring large amounts of funds to accounts that are not monitored by the community, lacking transparency.

Ogle conducted a detailed analysis of two suspicious fund transfer proposals. In October 2023, project leader Kevin Chan proposed transferring 100 million ACX tokens (approximately 15 million USD) to a private company of the team. On-chain analysis showed that the proposal was actually secretly driven by Kevin and his team, using multiple wallets to vote. Less than a year later, the team made another request for a "retrospective funding" of 50 million ACX tokens (approximately 7.5 million USD), again employing similar voting tactics.

This behavior is referred to by Ogle as "self-dealing," which he believes is strictly prohibited in any other industry. However, in the DAO ecosystem where effective regulation is lacking, such behavior seems to thrive more easily.

Ogle's allegations have sparked heated discussions within the community. Some members support his views, arguing that there are serious issues with the current DAO governance; others question Ogle's motives, suspecting that his accusations may be intended to promote his own project.

It is worth noting that Ogle's allegations are not an isolated case, but rather reflect the systemic issues that have long existed in DAO governance. These issues include:

1. Centralization of power: A few "whales" often have the ability to control voting outcomes.
2. Lack of voting transparency: Community members find it difficult to track actual voting behaviors.
3. Security risks of funds: Large amounts of money can easily become targets of attacks.
4. Ambiguity of legal liability: DAO members may face unexpected legal risks.

In the face of these challenges, the industry needs to seek solutions from multiple levels, including technology, mechanisms, and culture. For example, adopting zero-knowledge proof technology to protect voting privacy, optimizing token distribution and voting weight design, and introducing independent audits.

The Across incident is undoubtedly a wake-up call for the blockchain governance ecosystem. As an ideal vehicle for decentralization, the DAO carries the community's expectations for fairness and transparency, but its development still faces many challenges. The industry should take this opportunity to accelerate the improvement of governance mechanisms and truly realize the ideals of decentralization.