Introduction: The Institutional Gateway to Digital Assets and the Trust Imperative
Blockchain technology has matured beyond its origins. It now powers a diverse universe of digital assets, poised to unlock unprecedented institutional opportunities and drive business innovation. From alternative investment like ETFs and ETPs to stablecoin payments and efficiency-enhancing real-world asset tokenization e.g. bonds, equity, private debt, the institutional allure is undeniable.
This surge in institutional interest is fueled by several tailwinds: greater regulatory clarity, a maturing ecosystem of service providers such as custody, trading infrastructure, compliance solutions, data analytics, risk management tools, and rising client demand for yield. However, the linchpin for widespread and sustainable adoption lies in establishing robust trust – trust among market participants, regulators, and investors. This trust is built upon a foundation of comprehensive risk management and cutting-edge technology.
Recent event underscores this trust imperative. The Bybit heist, with approximately $1.46 billion in stolen crypto assets, demonstrates that even crypto-native companies are vulnerable to sophisticated attacks like supply chain exploits, UI manipulation, and social engineering. These complexities pose significant challenges for institutions, particularly those new to the digital asset space.
At Beacon VC, we believe that robust risk frameworks and advanced technologies are essential prerequisites for secure institutional engagement with digital assets. This conviction shapes our investment thesis: identifying opportunities in the infrastructure, tools, and services that empower this trust-building process.
In the article, we will walk through key vulnerabilities for institutions entering digital asset space, guideline on how to build comprehensive risk frameworks, technology landscape for digital asset compliance solutions, and how building these two foundations can create trust internally and externally.
Navigating the Labyrinth: Key Vulnerabilities for Institutions
Institutions venturing into digital assets face a spectrum of unique risks, stemming from both internal and external sources. These risks are amplified by the nascent nature of the digital asset class, characterized by challenges such as insufficient investor education, regulatory frameworks struggling to keep pace with the evolving digital asset landscape, and developing infrastructure, which collectively contribute to heightened fraud, market manipulation, money laundering, and overall market instability. This is further compounded by regulatory uncertainty and the borderless nature of digital assets, which facilitate cross-border threats and often outpaces businesses’ ability to protect investors. These internal and external vulnerabilities give rise to the following specific risks for institutions.
- Internal Vulnerabilities: These vulnerabilities arise from within the institution’s own technology, operations, and human factors.
- These relate to the systems and infrastructure used to manage digital assets.
- Private Key Compromise: can result in irreversible asset losses. Examples: supply chain attacks (third-party vendor), phishing, malware.
- Cybersecurity Breaches: Weaknesses in cybersecurity defenses can be exploited. Examples: network intrusions, ransomware attacks, DDoS attacks.
- Smart Contract Vulnerabilities: Flaws in smart contract code can be manipulated. Examples: code exploits, flash loan attacks.
- These relate to the systems and infrastructure used to manage digital assets.
-
- Human-Centric Risks: These vulnerabilities stem from human error, lack of awareness, or inadequate control.
- Lack of Adequate Training/Awareness: A deficient understanding of digital asset risks exposes institutions to increased operational and security risks due to employee errors.
- Weak Internal Controls/Governance: Insufficient controls and governance create opportunities for errors, fraud, or unauthorized activities.
- Operational Inefficiencies/Errors: Inefficient processes and human error in managing digital asset operations e.g., manual processes for transactions, reconciliation, or reporting can lead to losses and increased risks.
- Absence of Clear Policies/Procedures: Lack of well-defined internal policies for digital asset activities e.g., absence of policies for acceptable use, incident response, or employee trading can increase vulnerabilities and inconsistencies.
- Human-Centric Risks: These vulnerabilities stem from human error, lack of awareness, or inadequate control.
- External Vulnerabilities: These vulnerabilities arise from factors outside the institution’s direct control.
- Regulatory Risk: Failure to comply with regulations can result in penalties and legal issues such as deficiencies in KYC/AML controls. Furthermore, the inherent uncertainty in the evolving regulatory framework for digital assets creates a risk that any related decision may become non-compliant.
- Counterparty Risk: Risks associated with entities with which an institution interacts in the digital asset space, including exchanges, custodians, DeFi protocols, and other financial institutions. This risk encompasses the potential for these entities to default on their obligations, experience financial distress, or suffer operational failures.
- Protocol and Smart Contract Risks: technology or DeFi protocols that an institution uses. This includes risks from vulnerabilities in the underlying blockchain consensus mechanisms, potential for forks or network splits, and exploits of flaws in the code of smart contracts, which can lead to loss of funds or disruption of operations.
- Market-Related Risks:
- Market Manipulation and Fraud: Digital asset markets’ novelty and, in some cases, lack of regulation make them susceptible to manipulation e.g., pump-and-dump schemes and fraud.
- Geopolitical and Systemic Risks: External events e.g., government actions, network outages, significant market events can impact on the digital asset market. For instance, geopolitical tensions can lead to divergent and conflicting regulations across jurisdictions, creating a complex operating environment for institutions, while state-sponsored cyberattacks could target critical digital asset infrastructure, leading to systemic risks. These external factors introduce a layer of uncertainty that institutions must be prepared to navigate.
Considering these internal and external vulnerabilities, institutions face not only the risk of direct financial losses but also significant reputational risks. Both internal failures and external associations can severely harm an institution’s standing. Therefore, the next crucial step is to establish robust risk frameworks and leverage technology to proactively address and mitigate these potential financial and reputational risks.
The Cornerstones of Trust: Comprehensive Risk Frameworks
Institutions venturing into digital assets must prioritize robust risk frameworks that encompass governance, security, compliance, market risks, and operational aspects. These frameworks are essential not only for regulatory compliance, but also for sound internal operations.
Frameworks such as the Digital Asset Security Control Practices (DASCP) framework offer a valuable baseline for the industry. The DASCP is highlighted because its comprehensive and adaptable design is particularly well-suited to the digital asset space, enabling institutions to navigate current challenges and foster an inclusive resilient financial ecosystem that can evolve alongside technological advancements. DASCP employs a layered approach, establishing foundational principles, identifying associated risks, and designing flexible controls to address those risks.
The principles cover critical areas as the following from top priority as a necessary requirement to subsequent priority to achieve full potential.
- Legal Certainty: Ensure operations comply with current and evolving legal frameworks
- Regulatory Compliance: Align processes, controls, and procedures with specific rules and regulations issued by relevant regulatory bodies
- Resilience and Security: Build robust infrastructure and processes to withstand disruptions and protect data/assets
- Safeguarding Customer Assets: Establish strong governance and controls to securely manage client holdings
- Connectivity and Interoperability: Enable seamless transactions and settlements across diverse networks for efficient operations
- Operational Scalability: Design efficient, cost-effective systems through standardization and automation to handle increasing volume
Ultimately, institutions must tailor their risk management strategies to their specific circumstances, considering factors such as governance structure, business partner and service provider evaluation, data acquisition and analytics, transaction monitoring, and threat monitoring.
The Technological Imperative: Building Secure Foundations
In the preceding section, the necessity of comprehensive risk frameworks is emphasized to guide institutions in navigating the complexities of digital assets. These frameworks provide blueprints, and technology provides the necessary tools and infrastructure to execute that blueprint, enabling practical implementation and automation of the frameworks. According to Research and Markets, the Regulation Technology (RegTech) market is experiencing significant growth, projected to rise from US$ 7.55 billion in 2023 to US$ 42.73 billion by 2031, with a CAGR of 24.2%. This growth rate is likely even higher for the digital asset-specific RegTech segment, driven by increasing regulatory scrutiny, institutional adoption, the complexity of digital assets, the rise in illicit activities, and the demand for transparency and trust, necessitating specialized solutions for compliance, risk management, and security. As digital assets move toward mainstream adoption, RegTech plays a pivotal role in this transformation, leveraging technologies such as machine learning, AI, natural language processing, blockchain to bring digital transformation to compliance, focusing on areas like blockchain analytics, smart contract verification, risk intelligence, streamlined reporting, and combining advanced algorithms with human oversight.
In response to these evolving technological demands, digital asset compliance solutions can be categorized based on the fundamental requirements and challenges institutions faced when engaging with digital assets, ensuring security and adhering to regulatory obligations. Building upon the discussion of internal and external vulnerabilities and the importance of risk frameworks, this categorization demonstrates how technology provides practical tools to manage those risks. Specifically, custody solutions address private key compromise, cybersecurity solutions defend against cyberattacks, blockchain analytics and forensic tools help combat money laundering and fraud, and compliance automation enables compliance with regulatory demands. It follows logical progression from the foundational need for secure asset storage to the ongoing requirements for monitoring, risk management, and automated compliance processes.

These four categories represent the core pillars of a robust digital asset compliance framework for institutions, each addressing a fundamental requirement for security, regulatory adherence, and operational efficiency, collectively contributing to building the necessary trust for wider institutional adoption of digital assets.
Securing Trust: Implementing Risk Management and Technology
Building trust, both internally and externally, is crucial for the successful adoption and integration of digital assets by institutions. Internally, robust risk frameworks and secure technologies are essential to foster confidence among leadership, employees, and shareholders, facilitating internal buy-in by demonstrating effective risk management and secure asset handling. A well-trained and informed workforce is also vital for security and compliance.
Externally, institutions must demonstrate a proactive and responsible approach to build trust with stakeholders. This involves assuring clients of the safety of their digital assets through robust custody solutions and transparent reporting, providing regulators with assurance of compliance and market integrity via proactive engagement and adherence to evolving standards, and establishing credibility in the broader market through publicly share their security protocols and certifications or undergo independent audits and attestations to provide third-party verification of their security and compliance measures. A strong security and compliance posture mitigates reputational risk and attracts talent and partnerships by signaling a commitment to best practices.
Conclusion: Driving the Future of Institutional Digital Asset Adoption
The path to widespread institutional adoption of digital assets is paved with trust. This trust is not a given; it must be earned through the diligent implementation of robust risk management frameworks and the strategic deployment of advanced technologies. By proactively addressing vulnerabilities and prioritizing security, compliance, and operational efficiency, institutions can unlock the transformative potential of digital assets. Looking ahead, as trends like MiCA, institutional DeFi, and real-world asset tokenization reshape the landscape, the need for trust will only intensify. Beacon VC recognizes the pivotal role of companies developing the trust infrastructure necessary for this evolution, and we are committed to supporting their growth and innovation.
Building upon this concept of trust, the question, “Beyond Trust: The Next Frontier for Institutional Digital Asset Strategies,” warrants careful consideration to further explore the potential of institutional digital assets.
Author: Wanwares Boonkong (Pin)
Editors: Supamas Bunmee (Jae), Woraphot Kingkawkantong (Ping)
References:
https://medium.com/riva-markets/the-top-30-global-banks-digital-assets-use-cases-756e30f4b451
https://www.elliptic.co/blog/bybit-hack-largest-in-history
https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/advisory/articles/crypto-digital-asset-risk-management.html
https://eflowglobal.com/how-regtech-is-shaping-the-future-of-crypto-compliance/
https://www.rblt.com/fintech-insights/regtech-issues-in-cryptomarkets-and-digital-assets
https://cointelegraph.com/explained/ddos-attacks-in-blockchain-networks-explained
https://www.aon.com/en/insights/cyber-labs/flash-loan-attacks-a-case-study
https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/glossary/supply-chain-attack
https://cryptoslate.com/2021-was-the-year-of-institutional-crypto-adoption/