Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
XRP Cryptocurrency researcher SMQKE released a video on platform X to explore whether Ripple's security can surpass the global SWIFT messaging network and re-examine one of the most famous cyber attacks in the financial industry to highlight the importance of security in cross-border payments.
The post directly raised the question: "Is Ripple more secure than SWIFT?" The video does not give a clear answer, but uses the 2016 Bangladesh Central Bank cyber attack as an example to discuss possible loopholes in the financial infrastructure, which are not within the payment network itself.
The background of this discussion is that Ripple continues to position its technology as an alternative to cross-border payments, which makes comparisons with SWIFT increasingly frequent.
"Is Ripple more secure than SWIFT?" 
Listen. 
- SMQKE (@SMQKEDQG) July 30, 2026
The Bangladesh Central Bank attack highlights external security risks
In the video attached to SMQKE's post, the spokesperson first affirmed SWIFT's long-term role in international finance and described it as a highly secure system. However, the video points out that even secure networks can be compromised if attackers gain access through other weak links in the organization's infrastructure.
In support of this view, the spokesperson reviewed the 2016 Bangladesh central bank cyber attack. It was explained that the hackers exploited weaknesses in the bank's internal security environment, which reportedly included a misconfigured router. After obtaining the bank's SWIFT credentials, the attacker sent fraudulent payment instructions over the SWIFT network, resulting in the theft of approximately US$81 million from the Bangladesh Central Bank's account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Thespokesperson emphasized that the incident did not stem from a direct failure of SWIFT's core messaging system itself. Instead, the attack showed that the overall security of a network depends on every component connected to it. Once legitimate credentials are compromised, attackers can use this trusted system to make unauthorized transfers.
The video also pointed out that a large part of the stolen funds were allegedly exchanged for casino chips in Macau and other places, and most of the funds have not yet been recovered.
Ripple's security issues remain unresolved
While focusing on the Bangladesh Central Bank incident, the spokesperson did not assert that Ripple is safer than SWIFT. Instead, the video raises an open question: Can Ripple's technology and architecture reduce or mitigate the risks exposed by attacks originating outside the payment network?
The discussion shows that evaluating payment infrastructure needs to go beyond the message protocol itself and consider how an institution protects its credentials, systems, and operating environment.
Responding to SMQKE's post, cryptocurrency commentator Crypto Sensei said that such comparisons are likely to become more frequent as financial institutions continue to evaluate modern payment infrastructure. He added that meaningful adoption begins with asking questions about security, efficiency and the advantages of different payment networks before making long-term technology decisions.
