The Justice Department and the FBI disrupted a Hamas cryptocurrency fundraising operation, seizing roughly $560,000 and taking over web infrastructure used by the Al Qassam Brigades. The action followed a lengthy investigation with multiple court-authorized warrants and yielded data on thousands of would-be donors, showing that digital currencies and encrypted platforms are not the safe havens extremists hoped they were.
Federal agents spent more than a year tracking funds that Hamas moved through a rotating set of crypto addresses and exchanges. Investigators relied on human sources and technical work to link wallets to a fundraising network that used encrypted chats and a dedicated website to solicit donations. The case shows the limits of anonymity in the crypto world when law enforcement commits resources and legal authority to follow the money.
Three court-authorized warrants dated March 25, June 25, and October 10, 2025, played key roles in enabling seizures of assets tied to the operation. The FBI obtained the authority to reach into active wallets and infrastructure, ultimately capturing about $560,000 in digital donations. That haul was not the result of a single sweep but the end product of sustained effort to identify, trace, and intercept funds funneling to the terrorist group.
Agents also seized domains and servers that controlled the group’s main fundraising website, giving investigators control over an active pipeline of incoming donations. By taking over that infrastructure, the FBI could intercept transfers that were still in motion rather than merely freezing dormant accounts. The operation therefore both recovered money and disrupted the mechanics of ongoing solicitation.
Investigators recovered not only currency but also intelligence: thousands of contact records from people who reached out to donate. That information will be used to support ongoing counterterrorism work, with records feeding follow-up investigations and prosecutions where appropriate. The scale of donor outreach underlines how broad these networks can be, and how many individuals can be drawn into criminal financial systems.
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro delivered a blunt warning to those who bankroll terror: “A message to Hamas: We will stop your fundraising for terror. Your networks are not secure, your crypto is vulnerable, and we will not stop until your ability to wage war is defeated.” That language reflects an enforcement posture aimed at not only seizure but deterrence, demonstrating that criminal finance does not pay when confronted by sustained legal pressure.
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Eisenberg framed the seizures as part of a broader response to violent attacks and online radicalization. “These seizures deprive Hamas of resources it relies on to recruit and radicalize individuals online and finance barbaric attacks like the one on October 7, 2023. We will continue to tighten the vise on Hamas’s capacity for terror by infiltrating its online networks, confiscating its cryptocurrency, and shutting down its websites.” His statement ties the financial disruption directly to efforts to reduce the group’s operational reach.
This case follows an earlier DOJ action in March 2025 when roughly $201,400 in cryptocurrency linked to Hamas fundraising was seized. Court documents from that prior action describe how a Hamas-linked encrypted group chat circulated a changing list of at least 17 addresses, moving donations through operational wallets and then through exchanges and brokers. Prosecutors concluded that more than $1.5 million had been laundered through addresses connected to the scheme since October 2024, underlining the persistence and sophistication of the fundraising effort.
Investigators say Hamas began experimenting with cryptocurrency fundraising as early as 2019, using Telegram and websites to provide donors with instructions intended to obscure identities. A confidential source in the U.S. eventually tipped authorities to a Telegram post tied to the group’s fundraising effort. The evolution of these networks demonstrates how extremists tried to exploit technology to evade oversight and continue funding violent operations.
For policymakers and law enforcement, the operation offers clear takeaways: determined investigators can trace and intercept digital funding streams, and taking control of infrastructure disrupts ongoing activity. The case also signals that those who believe crypto provides impunity are mistaken when confronted by coordinated legal and technical work. With digital finance increasingly central to global money flows, contractors of terror will find it harder to hide when authorities pursue leads across platforms, jurisdictions, and technologies.
Add comment