Citibank Accused of Ignoring $20M Crypto 'Pig Butchering' Scam on OpenrarityPro — A Data-Driven Exposure

The Algorithm Didn’t See It

I reviewed the court filing from Manhattan Federal Court last night. Not because I’m curious—I’m paid to spot patterns others miss. The plaintiff’s claim isn’t dramatic; it’s predictable. Facebook ads led to a fake NFT creator on OpenrarityPro, and Citi, despite having transaction monitoring tools, did nothing. That’s not negligence—it’s architecture failure.

Data Doesn’t Apologize

We build models that correlate wallet activity with social signal noise: low engagement on verified profiles + high volume of outbound transfers = red flag #47B in our risk taxonomy. Citi’s systems were configured to prioritize liquidity over due diligence. Their ‘compliance layer’ ran on outdated heuristics—algorithms trained on clean data, but deaf to human deception.

The Real Scam Isn’t Crypto—It’s Trust

The crypto asset? Worthless without identity verification. But the real loss? $20M evaporated because no one asked: ‘Who owns this alert?’ We automate detection based on behavioral fingerprints, yet banks outsource risk management to vendors who don’t speak Mandarin—or English—for fear of liability.

I’ve run simulations where centralized entities act as passive nodes in a DeFi graph wired by bad incentives. When your model assumes trust over truth, you become part of the problem.

This isn’t about scams. It’s about who gets paid to see them.