The release of **Mythos**, an AI system designed to autonomously discover vulnerabilities in code, may do more than help blockchain developers find bugs. As **AI-powered security tools** become cheaper, faster and more widely available, researchers said they could reshape what the crypto industry considers reasonable due diligence before deploying code, potentially altering expectations for developers and institutions.

For years, smart contract security has been constrained by budgets. Comprehensive audits often are costly, making AI systems like Mythos dramatically cheaper. "It pushes the price of a basic audit toward zero," said **Alexander Urbelis**, chief information security officer at ENS Labs. Work that once required weeks and significant expense could eventually be completed in minutes, allowing projects that previously could not afford professional reviews to obtain fast security assessments.

For years, researchers have relied on automated tools known as **fuzzers** to hunt for software bugs. AI systems take a different approach. "It's a change in degree that could likely cause a change in kind," Urbelis said. "Machines have hunted bugs for years. But now we're talking about a fuzzer that has the capacity to reason."

Rather than simply identifying technical bugs, systems like Mythos could infer what code was intended to do and compare that against what it actually does. In crypto, where smart contract code is public and bug bounties can have big budgets, that capability could significantly expand the industry's ability to identify vulnerabilities before launch.

**David Schwed**, COO of blockchain security firm SVRN and founder of the cybersecurity master's program at Yeshiva University, described the shift as even more significant. "These models now operate the way a human attacker does," Schwed said. "They iterate, they take the next step based on what they're seeing in real time. The older tooling was just complicated deterministic flows."

But Schwed argued the bigger change may not be vulnerability discovery itself. It may be the emergence of **continuous security monitoring**. "The real shift is continuous auditing with suggested remediations at a fraction of the cost, instead of a point-in-time review you can only afford once," he said.

If security reviews become inexpensive and continuous, researchers said the industry's expectations could change alongside them. Urbelis said he believes AI could eventually reshape the **standard of care** around smart contract development. Historically, teams could point to the cost and complexity of audits as a reason certain reviews were not performed. That argument becomes more difficult when sophisticated security analysis is available on demand.

"A clean AI report will be seen as no defense," he said. "A plaintiff may well argue it the other way: the tool existed, it was cheap, and you should have caught it."

The prospect raises broader questions for the industry: if AI-powered security reviews become ubiquitous, will investors expect them before funding projects, and could failing to run AI-assisted audits eventually be viewed as **negligence**?

Despite the technology's promise, neither researcher said he believes AI is poised to replace human auditors. While machines excel at identifying coding flaws, Urbelis said they remain weaker at spotting the economic and incentive-based vulnerabilities that have contributed to some of crypto's largest losses. "The bugs that drain treasuries often turn on intent and adversarial incentives," he said. "Those still need an experienced human in the room."

Schwed offered a similar warning. "'Claude, audit my smart contract, make no mistakes' is not a security program," he said. "If the person running the tool can't evaluate what comes back, you haven't bought security, you've bought a false sense of it."

But whether a system like Mythos could have prevented major hacks, both researchers noted that many of crypto's most costly incidents did not originate from smart contract vulnerabilities. Urbelis pointed to the recent compromise of Drift, which he described as the culmination of a months-long **social engineering campaign** that targeted trusted contributors rather than the protocol's code. "The smart contract did exactly what it was told," he said. "The authority behind the instruction was what was compromised and abused."

Similarly, Schwed cited incidents such as Ronin and Bybit, where compromised keys and manipulated signing processes, rather than software vulnerabilities, played central roles. "No code scanner stops an authorized signer from approving a transaction they can't verify," he said.

That reality suggests AI will not eliminate crypto's security challenges. But the researchers argued it could fundamentally alter one part of the equation: the cost of finding bugs and the expectations surrounding their discovery.

As AI-powered security tools become cheaper, faster and more widely available, researchers said they could reshape what the crypto industry considers reasonable due diligence before deploying code, potentially altering expectations for developers and institutions. 

AI Is Revolutionizing Crypto Security: Cheaper, Faster, and Unavoidable

The long-standing alliance between two giants of the crypto payments segment — **XRP** and **Stellar (XLM)** — has been disrupted, with their synchronized price dynamics now a thing of the past. Since the end of May 2026, the assets have moved in opposite directions: **Stellar records major gains** while **XRP continues to decline**.

## The Battle for RWA

The sharp trend reversal was triggered by an official announcement from the **Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC)** about plans to launch asset tokenization — including stocks, ETFs and U.S. Treasuries — on the **Stellar blockchain** in the first half of 2027. Data from RWA.xyz shows why Stellar has taken the lead:

- **Distributed Asset Value**: On Stellar, this figure reached **$2.83 billion** (up 21.62% in 30 days). By comparison, XRPL stands at **$360.32 million** (down 10.83%).
- **30-day RWA transfer volume**: On Stellar, this metric increased by **142.34% to $661.84 million**, while XRPL recorded only **$44.93 million**.
- **RWA investor base**: The number of RWA holders on Stellar rose by **44.75% to 17,803 addresses**, while XRPL has only **122 addresses**.

The market noticed these figures, driving **XLM up about 49.44%** since the end of May, while **XRP fell by 15.78%** over the same period.

![RWA Distribution](https://u.today/sites/default/files/inline-images/stellarxrprwa.jpg)

At the same time, XRPL maintains an advantage in **total stablecoin volume** ($922.42M vs $296.24M) and **30-day stablecoin transfer volume** ($5.11B vs $4.27B).

## What's Happening on the Charts?

The daily timeframe indicators reflect a deep technical gap between the two assets.

On the **XLM chart**, the price explosion at the end of May expanded the Bollinger Bands, broke above the upper band, and reached a peak near **$0.29**. The RSI fell to **57.64** after leaving overbought territory, pointing to market stabilization.

![XRP and XLM Chart](https://u.today/sites/default/files/inline-images/image_4489.png)

The **XRP chart** shows the opposite picture. In early June, the coin broke below the middle Bollinger Band, confirming the dominance of sellers. XRP is trading near **$1.13**, trapped between the middle line at **$1.1739** and the lower Bollinger Band at **$1.0526**. The RSI has fallen to **39.34**, approaching oversold territory.

## Can XRP Repeat XLM's Success?

The current narrowing of the Bollinger Bands on the XRP chart indicates that the asset is accumulating energy before a strong move. Two scenarios:

- **Bullish scenario**: If the price holds above **$1.10** and the lower band at **$1.0526**, it could create a base for a rebound. To repeat Stellar's success, buyers need to restore XRPL's RWA status, break through **$1.1739**, and consolidate above **$1.2953**, opening the way to **$1.45–$1.60**.
- **Bearish scenario**: If buyers fail and capital flows to Stellar, XRP risks dropping from **$1.13** to retest the lower band at **$1.0526**, with possible decline toward **$1.00**.

Stellar rides a $2.8 billion RWA wave while XRP gets stuck at $1.13, but tightening Bollinger Bands put the next breakout scenario in the spotlight.

1 month ago Bitcoin Articles Digested