Kraken Reveals Extortion Demands After Client Data Incident: ‘We Will Not Pay’, Security Chief Says

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-04-14Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-04-14

Introduzione

Kraken, a major US crypto exchange, has publicly refused extortion demands from a criminal group following two incidents of unauthorized access to limited client support data. Chief Security Officer Nick Percoco stated the exchange identified and terminated access for individuals involved, emphasizing that no systems were breached and user funds remained safe. Approximately 2,000 client accounts (0.02% of users) were affected. Kraken is cooperating with law enforcement and industry partners to investigate what it describes as insider recruitment efforts targeting multiple sectors. The incident has sparked community concerns over insider threats and data security, drawing comparisons to a similar past event at Coinbase.

Kraken, the US’s second-largest crypto exchange, has rejected extortion threats from a criminal group after two incidents of unauthorized access to limited client support data in the past year, reigniting investors’ concerns about insider threats.

Kraken Fights Back Extortion Demands

On Monday, Kraken’s Chief Security Officer (CSO), Nick Percoco, revealed that a criminal group is extorting the crypto exchange, threatening to release videos of their systems exposing client data.

In a security update, the CSO affirmed that Kraken had identified and shut down two instances of inappropriate access to limited client support data since 2025. Per the post, the crypto exchange received a tip about a video shared on a criminal forum. The video reportedly showed access to Kraken’s client support system.

The exchange “immediately launched an investigation and quickly identified the individual involved as a member of our support team,” Percoco explained, “Their access was revoked immediately, a full investigation was conducted, additional security controls were put in place and a limited number of affected clients were notified.”

More recently, they received another tip with a new video showing similar activity, prompting a new investigation to identify the parties involved, terminate their access, and notify the affected clients.

“Shortly after access was terminated, we began receiving extortion demands,” the security chief stated. “The criminals threatened to distribute materials from both the February 2025 incident and the recent incident to media outlets and on social media if we did not comply.”

Percoco emphasized that the exchange’s systems were never breached and funds were never at risk. In addition, he noted that “only a very small number” of client accounts, approximately 2,000 or 0.02% of clients, were potentially viewed across both incidents.

Kraken has now publicly rejected the criminal demands, declaring that they “will not pay these criminals” and “will not ever negotiate with bad actors.”

In the announcement, the exchange highlighted that it has been collaborating with industry partners and law enforcement to “investigate and disrupt insider recruitment efforts targeting not only crypto companies, but also gaming and telecommunications organizations.”

Based on intelligence gathered from the two incidents and extensive analysis, Kraken believes there is sufficient evidence to identify and arrest all individuals involved, but did not share additional details as the investigation continues. However, they urged anyone with relevant information to contact the exchange directly.

This incident comes just a month after Kraken scored a major victory for the crypto industry, becoming the first crypto company with direct access to the Federal Reserve’s core payment system after winning the Kansas City Fed’s approval for a Fed master account.

Crypto Community Raises Insider Access Concerns

Crypto investors and Kraken users online reacted to the news, questioning the exchange about the details of the two incidents and criticizing the exchange for offshoring customer support staff.

“So, basically, you outsourced it to shady third-party companies (or even worse, your internal recruiters are sleeping), and you got hacked twice or more. You made your customers vulnerable to wrench attacks,” an X user wrote under Percoco’s post.

However, details of whether the inappropriate data access was from an in-house support team or an overseas third-party support staff have not been revealed yet.

Another crypto community member pushed back on Kraken’s “very small number” of clients clarification, asserting that “this is not the metric you think it is... of those 2000 accounts, they are probably the ones with balances worth wrench attacking.”

Others drew a parallel between this incident and Coinbase’s data breach controversy from last year. For context, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong revealed in May 2025 that malicious actors had bribed a handful of support contractors overseas to access the company’s internal tools.

This led to the leak of names, email addresses, limited transaction records, and partial Social Security numbers of around 1% of the exchange’s users. Then, the attackers attempted to blackmail Coinbase using the breached information, demanding a $20 million Bitcoin (BTC) ransom for the sensitive data.

Reuters later alleged that Coinbase had been aware of the customer data leak months before it disclosed it, also raising concerns about transparency and insider threats.

The total crypto market capitalization is at $2.43 trillion in the one-week chart. Source: TOTAL on TradingView

Domande pertinenti

QWhat did Kraken's Chief Security Officer reveal about the extortion demands?

AKraken's CSO Nick Percoco revealed that a criminal group is extorting the crypto exchange by threatening to release videos of their systems exposing client data, and that Kraken will not pay or negotiate with these criminals.

QHow many client accounts were potentially affected by the unauthorized access incidents at Kraken?

AApproximately 2,000 client accounts, or 0.02% of Kraken's clients, were potentially viewed across both incidents.

QWhat was the nature of the security incidents at Kraken, according to the company?

AThe incidents involved two instances of unauthorized access to limited client support data by individuals who were members of the support team, but the company's core systems were never breached and client funds were never at risk.

QHow did the crypto community react to Kraken's announcement of the security incidents?

AThe community questioned the details of the incidents, criticized the exchange for potentially offshoring customer support staff, and expressed concern that the affected accounts might be high-value targets for 'wrench attacks'.

QWhat parallel was drawn between this Kraken incident and another crypto exchange?

AThe incident was compared to Coinbase's data breach from May 2025, where malicious actors bribed overseas support contractors to access internal tools, leading to a data leak and a subsequent extortion attempt.

Letture associate

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Bitcoin prices declined 13% this week, reversing the recent rebound and signaling a likely transition into the later stages of a bear market. Key on-chain metrics deteriorated, with the short-term holder cost basis falling below the Realized Price—a pattern last seen in early 2022, characteristic of bear market maturity. The rally to ~$82k proved to be a bear market bounce, as evidenced by the 90-day realized profit/loss ratio failing to sustain above the bullish threshold of 2. Daily realized losses surged to $1.35B, including significant selling from long-term holders who accumulated near cycle tops, indicating ongoing supply redistribution. Price was rejected almost precisely at the aggregate US spot ETF cost basis of ~$83k, turning that level into resistance and leaving the average ETF investor underwater again. Spot market selling pressure intensified, with the 7-day volume delta turning significantly negative to its weakest level since February. While a major long liquidation event cleared over $400M in leverage, spot demand has not yet stepped in to absorb the resulting supply. Options markets continue pricing in higher future volatility (elevated volatility risk premium) and maintain a skew toward put options, reflecting persistent demand for downside protection, though not yet panic. Overall, market structure remains fragile. Sustained recovery likely requires a reclaim of the ETF cost basis, a shift back to positive spot demand, and a slowdown in realized loss-taking. Until then, the market risks further downside or extended consolidation within the broader bear trend.

Foresight News26 min fa

Bitcoin's 'Rally Ends,' Officially Entering the Later Stage of a Bear Market?

Foresight News26 min fa

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Summary: This article explores the perceived "death spiral" risk between MicroStrategy (MSTR), its Bitcoin holdings, and its perpetual preferred stock (STRC), drawing comparisons to the LUNA-UST collapse. While both systems feature price anchors, high yields for holders, and potential feedback loops, their core mechanisms differ fundamentally. The MSTR-STRC structure relies on continuous financing to sustain its high dividend payouts, primarily through stock ATM offerings. A negative feedback cycle could occur: falling MSTR stock price makes raising equity capital harder, increasing pressure to sell Bitcoin, which undermines STRC confidence and further depresses MSTR. However, unlike LUNA-UST's automated, direct linkage, the MSTR-STRC loop is weaker and has brakes: STRC dividends can be deferred or rates lowered, and STRC holders have a $100/share liquidation preference in bankruptcy, providing a price floor. The company's sustainability hinges on its ability to continue financing. Its current ~$900 million USD reserves cover only about 6.3 months of its ~$1.71 billion annual interest/dividend burden. The next six months are critical, aligning with both the potential bottom in Bitcoin's four-year cycle and the depletion timeline of its reserves. While a LUNA-style catastrophic collapse is deemed highly unlikely due to structural differences, the key question is whether MicroStrategy can navigate this period through healthy deleveraging to restart its capital engine.

Foresight News44 min fa

How Risky is the "Death Spiral" of MSTR and STRC?

Foresight News44 min fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

MicroStrategy's Debt Risk: A Turning Point in the "Never Sell" Strategy As of June 3, 2026, MicroStrategy holds 843,706 bitcoins (valued at ~$53.1B) but faces significant financial obligations. Its capital structure includes $6.75B in convertible notes and $15.48B in perpetual preferred stock (led by the $8.5B STRC series), creating an annual payout burden of ~$1.71B. With software revenue at only ~$500M, interest and dividend obligations far exceed operating income. A critical shift occurred in late May 2026 when the company sold 32 bitcoins for ~$2.5M to cover dividends, breaking CEO Michael Saylor's long-standing "never sell" pledge. This symbolic move triggered a sharp decline in both Bitcoin's price and MSTR stock, reflecting market fears about cash flow sustainability. The core of the strain is the STRC perpetual preferred stock, designed as a "permanent loan" with no maturity date but requiring high monthly dividends (currently 11.5%). Its business model relies on a three-part cycle: issuing new STRC shares, using proceeds to buy more Bitcoin and fund a USD reserve, and using that reserve to pay dividends. This cycle depends on continuous investor demand for STRC and Bitcoin's price appreciation. Analysis shows Bitcoin needs to appreciate at least 2.3% annually to cover the $1.71B in yearly obligations at current holdings. With Bitcoin price down ~22% from March 2026 highs, this pressure has intensified. The company's $900M USD reserve can only cover about 7 months of payments if STRC issuance stalls. Key risks are not immediate bankruptcy or forced Bitcoin liquidation (as BTC is not collateral), but rather: 1) The erosion of MSTR's premium to its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV), which would cripple its ability to raise cheap capital; 2) A vicious cycle where stagnant Bitcoin prices reduce STRC demand, draining the USD reserve and forcing BTC sales, further depressing prices. The period from February 2027 to September 2028 is a crucial test, with over $5.9B in convertible notes facing put options or maturity. In essence, MicroStrategy has evolved from a simple Bitcoin holder into a complex financial entity acting like a "private Bitcoin bank," leveraging its BTC holdings to create layered financial products. Its survival depends on maintaining Bitcoin's price trend, its stock premium, and market appetite for its preferred shares. The recent token sale marks not a betrayal of its Bitcoin thesis, but an admission that the leveraged strategy must eventually be paid for.

marsbit55 min fa

How Much Debt Does Strategy Really Have? Is There a Risk of Implosion?

marsbit55 min fa

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

Anthropic has published an article titled "When AI builds itself," discussing the emerging concept of "recursive self-improvement," where AI begins to actively participate in designing, training, testing, and optimizing its own subsequent versions. The company presents internal data showing that by May 2026, over 80% of code merged into its codebase was written by Claude, its AI model. Claude's capabilities have expanded to handling complex, open-ended engineering tasks, achieving a 76% success rate in such areas, and even contributing to research processes, such as optimizing code performance and conducting AI safety experiments. Anthropic outlines an evolution from human-driven development to AI-assisted workflows, culminating in the current stage where AI agents can autonomously write, run, and delegate code. The company cautions that the path toward a "closed loop," where AI continuously improves itself, is becoming visible. It calls for coordinated global mechanisms to potentially slow or pause frontier AI development to allow safety research and societal structures to catch up. However, the timing of this warning coincides with Anthropic's preparations for an IPO, framing the narrative not just as a safety concern but also as a demonstration of Claude's advanced capabilities and its integral role in accelerating Anthropic's own R&D—creating a potential "flywheel" effect for competitive advantage. This contrasts with OpenAI's recent, more policy-oriented discussion of the same risks, highlighting the competitive dynamics in the AI industry as companies position themselves in both the technological and regulatory landscape.

marsbit1 h fa

Anthropic Cries Wolf: Is the AGI Threat Real, or Just an IPO Story?

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片