A user lost $68 million in BTC, falling victim to a "dust attack".

[NikeFit_7777]

A user lost $68 million after falling victim to a "dust attack". The monitoring platform Cyvers Alerts detected a transaction for 1155 WBTC.

The dust attack is used by attackers as a tracking system - they tag the victim's wallets with microtransactions. As a rule, such wallets have similar addresses (beginning and end). Due to inattention, the user can use it in the future for a reciprocal payment.

Onchain analysts claim that this is the largest such attack.

P.S. Have any of you been in similar situations? If yes, please share your story. It will be helpful for others.

[Crwth]

I have seen those dust problems occurring but I didn't know that they can be used in such ways that someone with that amount could fall victim to it. It's just really being vigilant that you prevent those types of things.

[SamReomo]

P.S. Have any of you been in similar situations? If yes, please share your story. It will be helpful for others.

No, I have never been in a situation like that because I always try my best to copy the legit wallet address before executing any transaction. I feel really bad for that guy, $68M is a lot of money one can lose, and the poor guy lost it because he fall victim to a dust attack.

It's crypto world, the ones who lack awareness always face such problems in crypto world. The user has lost a huge amount, anyone having such amount could easily live his life without financial issues, but sometimes our lack of knowledge and awareness make us fall victim to the traps which people with malicious intention create for us. I really feel bad for that person, but unfortunately nothing can be done for him.

[babo]

A user lost $68 million after falling victim to a "dust attack". The monitoring platform Cyvers Alerts detected a transaction for 1155 WBTC.

~~~~~

In the meantime, thank you for reporting it to us and bringing it to our attention
second, explain to us better how the dust attack works with a concrete example using, address A 00000110 and address B 0000011o
It would help a lot to understand in my opinion
+1 karma for you

[jeraldskie11]

I have seen those dust problems occurring but I didn't know that they can be used in such ways that someone with that amount could fall victim to it. It's just really being vigilant that you prevent those types of things.

It's just like a drone to monitor the transactions of the users so that they can easily victimized the user if they found a hole. I don't know what exactly their way to steal people's money since it's 100% secured one you owned the private key, but until your device is infected. If you know that you are being tracked, the best way to do is to use mixers.

[hugeblack]

Such attacks can be avoided using a good wallet that hides any transactions with less than $ 10 or checking withdrawal/output address several times. I do not know what laziness is paying a person to send 1155 WBTC without checking the address several times.
My wallet has received a lot of dust amounts in the past, but it can easily avoid such a fraud.

[Stompix]

This is a weird story, and I think there's a lot of fake stuff in it.

First the sum, like rally $70 million and you don't even check the address?
Then, the only case that is actually solved and we have a nearly unknown company bragging about how they managed to get the money back:
https://www.cryptonews.net/news/security/29013603/
So the attacker was contacting the victim demanding 10% of the funds but at the same time it was moving the between exchanges...common!

It's just like a drone to monitor the transactions of the users so that they can easily victimized the user if they found a hole. I don't know what exactly their way to steal people's money since it's 100% secured one you owned the private key, but until your device is infected. If you know that you are being tracked, the best way to do is to use mixers.

There is no hack, no infection, no vulnerability, the attacker simply sends dust (small amount of coins) to different addresses that usually have interactions with other large addresses using himself an address that resembles the other ones.

So if you're use to move coins from your address to you excnge address for example  bc1q2ps0clygv8d5stq******* and you're to lazy to check and you copy paste from the history the attacker address bc1q2ps0clytv1d6sgy******* because it seems familiar you're done for.

[hugeblack]

First the sum, like rally $70 million and you don't even check the address?
Then, the only case that is actually solved and we have a nearly unknown company bragging about how they managed to get the money back:
https://www.cryptonews.net/news/security/29013603/
So the attacker was contacting the victim demanding 10% of the funds but at the same time it was moving the between exchanges...common!

Not only that, but the victim was able to restore his money even after the hackers converted it to Ethereum. The strange thing is that the Hacker used an unknown exchange, which is ----> https://www.trustpilot.com/review/cryptex.net and KYC policy ---> https://cryptex.net/en/page/kyc_aml_policy

Imagine that the hackers deposited $ 69.3 million to unknown exchange and with less than 17 reviews.


Hahahaha, the chances of asset recovery are linked to the speed of reporting.

The company estimates that the chances of asset recovery are as high as 70% if victims report incidents within the first hour. Successful recovery odds fall to 60% if cases are reported within four hours; 50% when reported within the first 24 hours.


Chances of a successful outcome are even slimmer, 20%, if you wait a month to report the incident.

[jeraldskie11]

It's just like a drone to monitor the transactions of the users so that they can easily victimized the user if they found a hole. I don't know what exactly their way to steal people's money since it's 100% secured one you owned the private key, but until your device is infected. If you know that you are being tracked, the best way to do is to use mixers.

There is no hack, no infection, no vulnerability, the attacker simply sends dust (small amount of coins) to different addresses that usually have interactions with other large addresses using himself an address that resembles the other ones.

So if you're use to move coins from your address to you excnge address for example  bc1q2ps0clygv8d5stq******* and you're to lazy to check and you copy paste from the history the attacker address bc1q2ps0clytv1d6sgy******* because it seems familiar you're done for.

Really? If the owner lose that much I think he will having a hard time to moved on. If all the crypto users know about this stuff or any kind of scams I believe they will not become a victim. I think that the owner are so confident to transfer any funds that makes him thinks there's nothing wrong. Sometimes we are just getting fooled by simple thing so this time I think we should have to be vigilant no matter how expert we are.

[Stompix]

~

Not only that, but the victim was able to restore his money even after the hackers converted it to Ethereum. The strange thing is that the Hacker used an unknown exchange, which is ----> https://www.trustpilot.com/review/cryptex.net and KYC policy ---> https://cryptex.net/en/page/kyc_aml_policy

Oh, another one weird thing to add then!

Everything smells like bs there
- the hack
- the ransom demand
- the splitting of coins
- the exchange to eth and the exchange where those were located, as you said...

This is how the funds went from there:
https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1cjicgq/68_million_lost_from_address_poisoning/
No way this guy would send all his coin to Cryptex in one batch!
On top of that the address never moved more than 10 WBTV and only to 1inch, how suddenly they decided to move all their 1000 WBTC?
I don't buy it!

[0t3p0t]

I don't personally know such attack existed until I read this thread. Very helpful to me as a non technical guy in this crypto space so thank you for sharing this here mate apreciate your effort.

[Captain Corporate]

More than anything else, I feel like we are talking about someone who keeps that much money in their account was the start of the problem. You do not get 68 million dollars worth of bitcoin and keep it all at the same place, it could be few different addresses, it could be few different places, doesn't really matter in the end but you just diversity the security as well. This would have prevented him losing this much, it would have allowed him to protect it. Imagine putting one million into 68 different places, this dude would have 67 million dollars and only lose 1 million in that case, would have been great for him.

[bitmover]

A user lost $68 million after falling victim to a "dust attack". The monitoring platform Cyvers Alerts detected a transaction for 1155 WBTC.

The dust attack is used by attackers as a tracking system - they tag the victim's wallets with microtransactions. As a rule, such wallets have similar addresses (beginning and end). Due to inattention, the user can use it in the future for a reciprocal payment.

I think those  ethereum wallets are more complicated.  Só much smartcontracts ans authorizations everywhere...  they are easier to make a mistake. Look that the user lost wbtc,  not btc.

Anyway, lack of attention was very expensive for him...

[JoyMarsha]

This is weird and heartbreaking for whoever that owes the BTC. For someone sending a huge amount of BTC are supposed to look closely to cross-check the receiving address before they hit the send button. However, I pray that should is a way out to trace the address is been sent to so that it can be recovered because this is not the kind of amount of BTC that should be lost ordinarily without a trace

[bhadz]

That is a lot, a life time savings. That is why it is essential to check our addresses once in a while and see if there have been transactions that have came in. And if you are not familiar with the transactions that came in then you have to consider it as someone is monitoring you and have been doing dust attacks. You need to protect your assets and at the same time be aware of these kind of threats and attacks that are choosing the ones with larger funds.