The Gladius ICO and SEC Action
In late 2017, Gladius Network LLC raised around $12.7 million in ETH through an Initial Coin Offering (ICO). The project promised a decentralized content delivery and DDoS protection network. One of the key figures surrounding the project was Nadav Dakner, through his marketing firm InboundJunction, which the official whitepaper listed as a marketing and PR partner. Dakner himself was also an investor and, by many accounts, acted more as a de facto CMO than an external consultant.
On February 20, 2019, the SEC issued Release No. 10608, charging Gladius with conducting an unregistered securities offering. The outcome was surprising:
No financial penalty was imposed. Instead, Gladius was ordered to register the tokens within 90 days (via a Form 10 under the Securities Exchange Act) and offer investors a refund (rescission).
The SEC justified this leniency because Gladius had “self-reported” and “cooperated.”
Deadlines Missed, Company Shut Down
What followed highlights a massive gap in investor protection:
- •The Form 10 registration deadline was first set for May 20, 2019, later extended to November 18, 2019.
- •Gladius never filed. Instead, in November 2019, the company announced it was shutting down due to lack of funds.
- •Investors reported that refunds were not honored, despite the SEC’s rescission order.
And yet, there is no evidence of further SEC enforcement. The SEC docket still lists the 2019 action — with no follow‑up despite Gladius failing to comply. Investors were left behind, and the founders quietly disappeared.
Why Nadav Dakner’s Role Matters?
This is where Nadav Dakner’s involvement becomes critical. In Gladius’ own lawsuit filings, Dakner is described as the person who introduced the project to Krypton Capital, a fund linked to Ilan Tzorya. Krypton itself has been tied to individuals such as Gery Shalon and Vladimir Smirnov, both implicated in major financial crimes, including money laundering and massive cyber fraud.
Dakner’s introduction of Gladius to Krypton was not a minor networking move. It connected the project to highly controversial players with criminal backgrounds. Despite this, Dakner continued to operate in the industry, founding Chainwire, FinanceWire, and MediaFuse, all while presenting himself as a respected marketing executive.
We covered some of these issues in our previous piece "Chainwire and FinanceWire: Proceed with Caution". The pattern is clear: questionable associations, regulatory failures, and a striking lack of accountability.
The SEC’s Loophole Problem
The bigger picture here is the SEC’s handling of such cases. By choosing not to impose a penalty and instead relying on “cooperation” and “future promises,” the regulator created a loophole:
A company could self-report, receive no fine, promise to register/refund, and then simply shut down before following through.
This left investors without protection, despite a high‑profile SEC order.
Why the SEC extended deadlines, why it didn’t enforce its own orders, and why no follow‑up actions were taken against Gladius remains unclear. We note that this happened under a U.S. administration that was broadly skeptical of crypto, with regulators like Gary Gensler already positioned as critical voices in the sector. Yet, even under this environment, over $12 million in investor funds vanished without accountability.
What Comes Next?
At Cryptoticker, we are considering a formal public records request to the SEC, asking for a final status report on Gladius. Specifically:
- •Did Gladius ever attempt to refund investors?
- •Why was the 90‑day Form 10 deadline extended, and on what grounds?
- •Why were no penalties imposed for non‑compliance?
The Gladius case shows how investors can be left unprotected even in the face of SEC enforcement. Meanwhile, individuals like Nadav Dakner continue to expand their businesses in crypto PR and marketing — seemingly untouched by the failures of past projects.