Losses from the Coldcard Hack: How Researchers Track Stolen Bitcoin

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-11Last updated on 2026-08-11

Abstract

A security breach affecting Coldcard hardware wallets highlights the challenges of estimating losses from attacks on non-custodial wallets, as there is no complete list of compromised addresses. Analytic firms have provided differing estimates. CryptoQuant confirms losses of 1,432 BTC, using a strict methodology that only counts funds from publicly reported victim addresses. Galaxy Research and TRM Labs assess a higher minimum of around 1,730 to 1,816 BTC stolen from over 5,200 addresses. They combine direct victim reports with analysis of on-chain transaction patterns linked to the attack's waves. Galaxy notes that while victim reports have helped identify over 450 BTC in confirmed losses and pattern-matching suggests over 730 BTC more, many suspected funds remain unconfirmed. Experts agree that establishing a precise total is difficult. Julio Moreno of CryptoQuant stated the final figure will always be an estimate, as researchers can only verify what victims disclose publicly. The lack of a central entity, like an exchange, complicates verification, and relying solely on on-chain patterns risks false positives and overestimation.

The Coldcard hack has shown how difficult it is to assess the damage to owners of non-custodial wallets: the scale of the theft is largely determined by reports from victims.

The blockchain analytics platform CryptoQuant currently estimates confirmed losses at 1,432 $BTC, while other analysts have tracked significantly more funds linked to the attack.

Galaxy Research and blockchain analytics firm TRM Labs believe the damage is higher. They distinguish between losses directly confirmed by victims and funds attributed to the attack based on on-chain patterns.

This complicates the assessment of attacks on non-custodial wallets: unlike a centralized exchange hack, there is no complete list of affected addresses. Researchers have to build estimates, not determine a final damage figure.

Galaxy Tracks Losses Beyond Victim Reports

Alex Thorn from Galaxy told Cointelegraph that the platform's previous estimate—up to 1,816 $BTC—was a preliminary, not a confirmed total loss figure.

As of Tuesday, Galaxy assessed with high confidence a minimum damage of 1,730 $BTC. According to Thorn, the amount could rise if new victim reports confirm the attack patterns.

Source: Galaxy Research

"We have directly confirmed over 450 $BTC based on victim reports; however, these reports helped identify other, previously unknown victims with losses exceeding 730 $BTC," Thorn said. Galaxy uses these reports to confirm broader attack patterns but does not count funds it suspects are linked but cannot reliably verify yet. "We are still not counting many $BTC that are suspicious but lack sufficient confirmation," Thorn added.

Related: Coldcard Hackers Moved 64 $BTC and 200 ETH to Crypto Mixers

TRM Labs stated that its independent estimate is in the same range as Galaxy's, and recent analysis showed that the attackers stole about 1,816 $BTC from over 5,200 addresses across four attack waves. "Researchers should expect the estimate to rise before stabilizing," Ari Redbord, TRM's Global Head of Policy, told Cointelegraph.

CryptoQuant Applies a Stricter Approach

CryptoQuant Head of Research Julio Moreno told Cointelegraph that the company starts with public victim reports, including wallet addresses and transaction IDs, then cross-references them with known on-chain attack patterns.

This approach gives CryptoQuant a confirmed estimate of 1,432 $BTC. Moreno called it a lower bound that could rise if more victims publicly reveal their compromised addresses.

Source: CryptoQuant

Moreno stated that CryptoQuant is cautious about identifying victims based solely on on-chain patterns, as it could lead to false positives and inflate the estimate.

"Since the stolen bitcoins belonged to individuals and not a centralized organization like an exchange, we can only confirm what each victim discloses publicly," he said.

Difficult to Pinpoint an Exact Figure

Moreno emphasized that the total amount will remain an estimate, as researchers can only confirm information disclosed by victims. He explained:

"It is difficult to establish the total number of stolen $BTC, and it will always be an estimate."

Chainalysis told Cointelegraph that it had not conducted an independent loss assessment, while blockchain researcher ZachXBT publicly stated he does not plan to track or investigate this incident.

Magazine: Do Coldcard Attacks Mean All Hardware Wallets Are Now Insecure?

end-content

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the main difficulty in assessing the damage from the Coldcard hack, according to the article?

AThe main difficulty is that, unlike a centralized exchange hack, there is no complete list of affected addresses. Researchers must rely on victim reports and on-chain pattern analysis to build estimates rather than establish a definitive total.

QWhat are the differing approaches to estimating the losses, as mentioned in the article?

AGalaxy Research and TRM Labs use victim reports to identify wider attack patterns and estimate higher losses, while CryptoQuant applies a stricter method, starting only with publicly confirmed victim reports to avoid false positives, resulting in a lower confirmed estimate.

QWhat is CryptoQuant's current confirmed estimate of losses from the Coldcard hack, and why is it considered a 'lower bound'?

ACryptoQuant's confirmed estimate is 1432 BTC. It is considered a 'lower bound' because it only includes losses from victims who have publicly revealed their compromised addresses and transaction IDs. The figure could grow if more victims come forward.

QWhat does Galaxy Research consider its 'high-confidence' minimum damage estimate, and how does it arrive at this figure?

AGalaxy Research's high-confidence minimum damage estimate is 1730 BTC. It arrives at this by directly confirming over 450 BTC from victim reports and using those reports to identify patterns that point to other, previously unknown victims with over 730 BTC in losses.

QWhy does the article state that establishing a total number of stolen BTC will always be an estimate?

ABecause the stolen funds belonged to individuals using non-custodial wallets, not a centralized entity. Researchers can only confirm what victims choose to disclose publicly. Without a complete victim list, any total figure remains an approximation based on available data and pattern analysis.

Related Reads

FTX Scenario? BitMart Accused of Issues With Withdrawals and Insolvency

Cryptocurrency exchange BitMart, which previously announced its closure, is facing accusations of insolvency and withdrawal issues, drawing comparisons to the FTX collapse. Despite announcing a gradual wind-down until January 2027 and assuring users they could withdraw assets, reports emerged of significant problems shortly after. On-chain analysts noted unusually low withdrawal volumes, with some users reporting failed or stuck transactions. BitMart's CEO, Sheldon Xia, eventually broke the company's silence on August 8, 2026, claiming the team was consolidating assets for an orderly shutdown and denied misappropriating funds, mentioning potential court and auditor involvement. However, new complaints arose. A user named BeardStaff claimed $10.1 million was stuck, while Matthew Wang, co-founder of market maker OpenGradient, accused BitMart of insolvency, noting his firm's funds were also trapped. Wang highlighted a suspicious offer from BitMart for high-yield, locked staking just a week before the closure announcement. Numerous other users reported being unable to withdraw sums ranging from thousands to millions of dollars. Several crypto projects, including Gen6, Paxi Network, and Scandic Coin, are pursuing legal action. Data from Arkham Intelligence shows BitMart's wallet holdings have plummeted from over $100 million in early July 2026 to around $36.4 million, while CoinMarketCap data indicates reserves are only $4.6 million, mostly in BitMart's native BMX token.

cryptonews.ru41m ago

FTX Scenario? BitMart Accused of Issues With Withdrawals and Insolvency

cryptonews.ru41m ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

1.8k Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

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 BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片