Galaxy Digital and Duel Casino in Conflict Over 230 ETH Related to Coldcard Vulnerability

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-03Last updated on 2026-08-03

Abstract

A conflict has emerged between Galaxy Digital and online gambling platform Duel Casino regarding approximately 230 ETH suspected to be linked to the Coldcard wallet vulnerability. Galaxy's head of research, Alex Thorn, accused Duel Casino of refusing to freeze the allegedly stolen funds despite receiving forensic data linking the addresses to the hack. Thorn warned that Duel would become complicit in theft by not acting. In response, a Duel team member defended their policy, stating they cannot freeze a user's balance based solely on claims from a third party to prevent potential abuse. They proposed an exception if the alleged victim could send a message from the "hacked" address and provide a signed statement and transaction proof. The platform insists on requiring some form of official confirmation, typically from law enforcement, before taking action. This stance has drawn criticism from some users but also received support from figures like a former Delphi Digital executive, who called it a sensible policy for crypto-related fintech apps. The incident highlights ongoing dilemmas as criminals attempt to launder proceeds from the larger hack involving over 1,300 stolen BTC.

Funds allegedly connected to the Coldcard vulnerability are already on the move and flowing to third-party platforms as criminals attempt to launder them.

Alex Thorn, Head of Research at Galaxy Digital, highlighted the behavior of Duel Casino, an online gambling platform that is claimed to have received nearly 230 ETH as a result of the Coldcard hack.

According to Thorn, the platform refused to freeze these funds even after receiving data linking the addresses and transactions to this incident. In response, Duel asked for a police report to be filed, despite allegedly already having access to the incriminating information.

Thorn called Duel's inaction outrageous, emphasizing that a police report would, at best, not arrive until Monday.

"These shady people refuse to freeze funds that have been proven through forensic analysis to be the result of an actual cyber incident. If they do not freeze these funds, they will become accomplices to the theft," he stated.

A member of the Duel team, known on X by the handle Korra, emphasized that they cannot freeze a user's funds just because a third party claims they are stolen, as people could potentially abuse this system for their own gain.

Korra then suggested making an exception if the alleged victim sends a message from the "hacked" address, signs a written statement confirming their account was hacked, and provides the transaction chain proving these funds were sent to Duel's wallets.

"You have to understand why this policy exists: we require SOME official confirmation that a theft actually occurred (i.e., typically confirmation from law enforcement of any kind), otherwise anyone could make any claim about their own balance, about a counterparty, or about a third party they don't even know, and get accounts frozen," Korra emphasized.

Duel Casino's policy has caused dissatisfaction among some users, who criticized the gambling platform for not imposing a temporary freeze on these funds while investigating the source of the funds mentioned in the claim.

Despite this, Korra reaffirmed Duel Casino's position.

"We don't block your balance in Duel just because someone asks us to. We simply don't do it. I'm very sorry, but that's how it is, and we will stick to this position," concluded Korra.

Former Delphi Digital Chief Legal Officer Gabriel Shapiro supported Duel Casino's stance: "This remains perhaps my only unpopular opinion, but I still believe it's practically the only sensible policy a fintech/crypto-related application can have..." he noted.

As more wallets are being drained and the perpetrators attempt to cash out part of the more than 1,300 stolen BTC, it should be expected that more users, companies, and institutions will face similar dilemmas.

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the core conflict between Galaxy Digital and Duel Casino according to the article?

AThe core conflict is over approximately 230 ETH allegedly stolen via the Coldcard exploit. Galaxy Digital's Head of Research, Alex Thorn, accused Duel Casino of receiving these stolen funds and criticized the platform for refusing to freeze them without a formal police report, which Thorn deemed outrageous and tantamount to aiding theft.

QWhat was Duel Casino's primary reason for not freezing the funds as requested?

ADuel Casino's primary reason, as stated by a team member known as Korra, is their policy against freezing user funds solely based on third-party claims of theft. They argue this is necessary to prevent abuse of the system, requiring official confirmation, typically from law enforcement, that a theft has actually occurred.

QWhat specific proof did Korra from Duel Casino suggest the alleged victim could provide for an exception to their freezing policy?

AKorra suggested an exception could be made if the alleged victim sent a message from the 'hacked' address, signed a written statement confirming their account was compromised, and provided the transaction chain proving the funds flowed to Duel's wallets.

QWhich notable figure expressed support for Duel Casino's policy, and what was their main argument?

AGabriel Shapiro, former Chief Legal Officer of Delphi Digital, supported Duel Casino's policy. His main argument was that this is practically the only reasonable policy a crypto-related fintech application can have, implying it's a necessary standard for the industry despite being unpopular.

QWhat broader trend or expectation does the article mention in its conclusion regarding the Coldcard exploit?

AThe article concludes that as more wallets are drained and the attackers attempt to cash out part of the over 1,300 stolen BTC, more users, companies, and institutions should expect to face similar dilemmas regarding the handling of potentially stolen funds.

Related Reads

On the Eve of Circle's Earnings Report, Wall Street Shows Major Divergence in CRCL Valuation

On the eve of Circle (CRCL) releasing its quarterly earnings report, Wall Street analysts are deeply divided over the company's valuation. Morgan Stanley downgraded Circle from "Equal Weight" to "Underweight," slashing its price target from $106 to $38. Analyst James Faucette argues the market overestimates the growth potential of Circle's core USDC stablecoin, noting its circulation hasn't increased since Q3 2025 and new use cases beyond remittances and card spending are limited. He warns that slowing USDC growth could pressure the crucial "reserve income" and shift revenue toward lower-margin transaction fees. In stark contrast, TD Cowen initiated coverage with a "Buy" rating and an $82 price target. Analyst Bryan Bergin believes the market underestimates Circle's potential to evolve from a stablecoin issuer into a broader digital financial infrastructure platform. He forecasts a ~31% annual growth rate for USDC through 2030 and expects faster growth in fee-based revenue from services like payments, RWA tokenization, and its Arc network. A key external factor adding uncertainty is the stalled progress of the CLARITY Act in the US Senate, whose delay could dampen institutional adoption expectations for stablecoins. The core disagreement lies in whether Circle's future hinges on USDC circulation growth or a successful platform-based transformation. The upcoming earnings report is keenly awaited for insights into reserve income trends and the progress of newer business verticals.

marsbit7m ago

On the Eve of Circle's Earnings Report, Wall Street Shows Major Divergence in CRCL Valuation

marsbit7m ago

Hong Kong Stock Market in July: Super IPOs Coexist with Wave of Breakings, Hard Tech Still the Main Theme

The Hong Kong IPO market in July presented a "two-tiered" scenario characterized by both a mega-IPO and a significant wave of new stock listings falling below their issue price ("breaking issue"). The highlight was Zhongji Innolight's (stock code: 03308.HK) listing on July 30, which raised approximately HK$53.41 billion. This marked the largest IPO on the Hong Kong exchange in nearly seven years since Alibaba's secondary listing. A prominent trend was the continued dominance of A+H listings, with companies like Luxshare (02475.HK) and others contributing significantly to the total monthly fundraising of around HK$116 billion. In stark contrast, the market saw a sharp rise in "broken issues." Out of 17 new listings for the month, 7 broke issue on their debut, with the rate climbing to 47% by month-end. Factors contributing to this included an intense concentration of listings (15 in one week), profit-taking by investors, and a market reassessment of valuations, particularly for companies with unclear commercial prospects. Despite the sell-off, hard tech remained the core theme, accounting for over 70% of July's listings. Key sectors were semiconductors and AI/autonomous driving. However, market enthusiasm became highly selective, with extreme over-subscription for certain niche players while others were heavily sold off. This signals a shift from speculative fervor towards a more value-driven assessment. Looking ahead, recent listing reforms by the Hong Kong Exchanges are expected to attract more tech firms. With a large pipeline of over 350 companies awaiting listing, including potential large offerings like SHEIN, the market is poised for continued activity. Analysts view July's correction not as a downturn but as a healthy valuation reset, emphasizing the need for investors to carefully discern company fundamentals.

marsbit9m ago

Hong Kong Stock Market in July: Super IPOs Coexist with Wave of Breakings, Hard Tech Still the Main Theme

marsbit9m ago

Wall Street Shows Sharp Divergence in CRCL Valuation on the Eve of Circle's Earnings Report

On the eve of its earnings report on August 5th, significant divergence emerged on Wall Street regarding the valuation of Circle (CRCL). Morgan Stanley downgraded Circle from "Equal Weight" to "Underweight," slashing its target price from $106 to $38. Analyst James Faucette argues that the market has overestimated the growth potential of USDC, noting stagnant circulation since Q3 2025 and a lack of major new use cases beyond remittances and card spending. He warns that slower USDC growth could pressure Circle's core "reserve income" and shift its revenue mix toward lower-margin transaction fees, making current valuations excessive. In contrast, TD Cowen initiated coverage with a "Buy" rating and an $82 target price. Analyst Bryan Bergin believes the market underestimates Circle's potential to evolve from a stablecoin issuer into a broader digital financial infrastructure platform. He focuses on future services like payments, asset management, RWA tokenization, and blockchain infrastructure, forecasting a ~31% CAGR for USDC circulation through 2030 and faster growth in fee-based revenues. A key external variable is the delayed progress of the CLARITY Act, whose uncertainty may pressure market sentiment by slowing regulatory clarity for stablecoins. Ultimately, the split centers on whether Circle's value hinges on USDC growth or its platform transformation. The upcoming earnings report will be scrutinized for details on reserve income, payment services, and RWA initiatives.

Odaily星球日报12m ago

Wall Street Shows Sharp Divergence in CRCL Valuation on the Eve of Circle's Earnings Report

Odaily星球日报12m ago

July Security Report: Total Losses Approximately $97 Million, Cross-Chain Bridge Attacks Concentrated with Over $35 Million

In July 2026, the cryptocurrency sector suffered total losses of approximately $97 million, with hacker attacks and contract vulnerabilities accounting for about $94 million. A significant trend was the shift in attack vectors from smart contract code to off-chain infrastructure, signature key leaks, and governance manipulation. Major incidents included: * **Ostium ($23.75M loss):** An attacker gained access to its off-chain price oracle signing system, manipulated BTC prices, and drained funds. * **AFX Trade Bridge ($24.15M loss):** The private validator key for its cross-chain bridge was compromised, allowing unauthorized withdrawals. * **BonkDAO ($20M loss):** An attacker acquired enough tokens to pass a malicious governance proposal and drain the treasury, exploiting low voting thresholds. * **Bonzo Lend ($9.05M loss):** A third-party oracle provider's signature verification was exploited to inject manipulated token prices. * **Verus Bridge ($7.55M loss):** A repeat attack exploiting the same unpatched bridge vulnerability. * **B2 Network ($3.86M loss):** An attacker seized the upgrade authority for a staking contract. Cross-chain bridges remained a prime target, with concentrated attacks causing over $35 million in losses. Phishing scams resulted in roughly $3 million in losses, employing sophisticated methods like fake mobile apps and physical counterfeit letters targeting Ledger users. Key takeaways are the acceleration of attacks on off-chain infrastructure, the persistent vulnerability of cross-chain bridges, and the rising prominence of governance-layer exploits. Recommendations include enhancing off-chain key management with multi-sig security, implementing stricter governance controls, and increasing user vigilance against phishing.

marsbit46m ago

July Security Report: Total Losses Approximately $97 Million, Cross-Chain Bridge Attacks Concentrated with Over $35 Million

marsbit46m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片