AI Safety

Binance says it will cover losses after the $6.3 billion hot-wallet theft

Yusuf İpek follows the October 29 attack, the signing-system investigation and the response from Binance and blockchain researchers.

Source: Yusuf İpekNovember 2, 20262 sections
18
On this page
  1. Withdrawals through compromised infrastructure
  2. Frozen assets and Binance’s coverage pledge
  3. Source
A turtle protects a broken vault as coins escape.A hot-wallet breach

Conceptual cover created with AI.

The Yusuf İpek channel’s technology report examines the theft from Binance’s hot wallets on October 29. In its October 30 update, Binance put the loss at approximately $6.3 billion and said it would absorb the impact through its SAFU fund and corporate treasury.

Withdrawals through compromised infrastructure

Binance dated the incident to about 20:05 UTC. Its initial investigation pointed to a compromised laptop, while subsequent work identified additional compromise points. The exchange reported no evidence that wallet private keys had leaked; the investigation remained ongoing.

The Yusuf İpek channel’s diagram of the hot wallet and signing system.
The Yusuf İpek channel’s diagram of the hot wallet and signing system.

TRM Labs traced transfers across ten blockchains. Its analysis describes valid signatures and an Ethereum delegation that gave attacker-controlled code the ability to sweep a hot wallet. TRM attributed the incident to the North Korean group TraderTraitor.

TRM Labs’ chart of transfers from Binance to attacker wallets.
TRM Labs’ chart of transfers from Binance to attacker wallets.

Frozen assets and Binance’s coverage pledge

TRM’s snapshot at 00:30 UTC on October 30 counted roughly $2.7 billion frozen. Binance’s later update put the frozen total around $3 billion. These are differently timed figures; freezing funds is not the same as recovering them.

The channel’s overview of assets involved in the incident.
The channel’s overview of assets involved in the incident.

Binance said it had set aside more than $6.34 billion in company funds and was buying the remaining affected assets. Restoring withdrawals was tied to security checks, rather than an unconditional reopening deadline.

The source behind this story

Source:Yusuf İpek ↗Official source · Opens in a new tab

This editorial story is based on the source’s explanations. The creator’s experience and claims are distinct from independently verified findings. Video and source images belong to their respective creators.

Your favourites

This list stays in this browser on your device. No account is needed, and other visitors cannot see it.

Use a story’s bookmark button to add your first favourite.