Is Ethereum’s activity growth fake? Behind the 3.86mln poisoned wallets

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-01-20Last updated on 2026-01-20

Abstract

Ethereum's recent surge in network activity, including a 170% increase in new addresses and record-high transactions, is largely artificial and driven by a large-scale address poisoning attack. Security researcher Andrey Sergeenkov found that around 80% of this growth came from stablecoin transactions, with 3.86 million out of 5.78 million new addresses receiving initial transfers of less than $1. These "dust" payments are used by attackers who mimic victim wallet addresses to trick users into sending funds to fraudulent accounts. The Fusaka upgrade, which reduced ERC-20 transfer fees by nearly six times, made such attacks profitable by enabling mass spam transactions. Despite a low success rate, one victim lost $509,000, highlighting the risks behind these inflated metrics.

Ethereum [ETH] just posted some of its busiest network metrics on record, but all that glitters isn’t gold. According to security researcher Andrey Sergeenkov, much of this activity is caused by a large-scale address poisoning attack!

What you should know

On the surface, the data is impressive.

New Ethereum addresses went 2.7x above the 2025 average.

Peak was around the 12th of January, with 2.7 million new addresses; 170% increase over normal levels. At the same time, weekly transactions went up 63%, going from 10.5 million to a record 17.1 million.

But when Sergeenkov dug deeper, he reported that around 80% of this growth was driven by stablecoins, mainly USDT and USDC.

What’s interesting is that stablecoins are often used in automated activity. So, in this case, the numbers were unusually skewed.

Looking at first-time stablecoin transactions, the pattern became clear. 67% of new addresses received less than $1 as their very first transfer. In total, 3.86 million out of 5.78 million addresses received these tiny “dust” payments.

This is obvious address poisoning.

But what is that?

Attackers send tiny amounts of tokens to wallets using addresses that closely resemble a victim’s real one. When users later copy an address from their transaction history without checking it carefully, they end up sending funds to the attacker.

Sergeenkov identified the main culprits by tracking USDT and USDC transfers under $1 between the 15th of December and 18th of January 2026. He filtered for senders that distributed dust to at least 10,000 unique addresses, and uncovered several large-scale operators.

The top three contracts alone sent dust to more than 1.6 million addresses. One distributed dust to 690,000 wallets, another to 589,000, and a third to 405,000.

How Fusaka changed things

Address poisoning wasn’t always worth the effort. The success rate is extremely low (about 0.01%) so attackers depend on a few big mistakes to make money. In this case, one victim alone lost $509,000, making up most of the funds stolen so far.

That changed in December.

Ethereum’s Fusaka upgrade cut average ERC-20 transfer fees by nearly 6x, making it cheap to send millions of spam transactions.

Almost overnight, large-scale poisoning became profitable.

New contracts have appeared in recent days, with one already sending dust to 78,000 addresses. All major attacker contracts are active, and the biggest losses often happen toward the end.


Final Thoughts

  • Ethereum’s record growth is being inflated by address poisoning.
  • The Fusaka upgrade cut fees 6×, making it a profitable attack.

Related Questions

QWhat is address poisoning in the context of Ethereum, and how does it work?

AAddress poisoning is an attack where scammers send tiny amounts of tokens (dust) to wallets using addresses that closely resemble a victim's real one. When users later copy an address from their transaction history without carefully checking it, they may accidentally send funds to the attacker's address.

QAccording to the researcher, what percentage of Ethereum's recent new address growth was driven by stablecoins?

AAccording to security researcher Andrey Sergeenkov, around 80% of the recent growth in new Ethereum addresses was driven by stablecoins, mainly USDT and USDC.

QHow did the Fusaka upgrade on Ethereum make address poisoning attacks more profitable?

AEthereum's Fusaka upgrade cut the average ERC-20 transfer fees by nearly 6 times, making it significantly cheaper for attackers to send millions of spam transactions, thus making large-scale address poisoning a profitable endeavor.

QHow many 'dust' payments were sent to new addresses during the attack period mentioned in the article?

AA total of 3.86 million out of 5.78 million new addresses received tiny 'dust' payments of less than $1 as their first transfer.

QWhat was the estimated success rate of the address poisoning attack, and what was a significant loss mentioned?

AThe success rate of the address poisoning attack is extremely low, estimated at about 0.01%. However, one victim alone lost $509,000, which made up most of the stolen funds mentioned in the report.

Related Reads

Anthropic Starts Poaching Scientists? $27K Weekly Onsite Stipend to Fix Claude's Expert-Level Errors

Anthropic has launched a new STEM Fellow program, offering $3,800 per week for a three-month, in-person residency in San Francisco. The role targets experts from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields—machine learning experience is helpful but not required. Instead, Anthropic values scientific judgment and a willingness to learn quickly. Fellows will work with Claude models and internal tools under the guidance of an Anthropic researcher. Example projects include a materials scientist identifying errors in Claude’s reasoning or a climate scientist integrating atmospheric modeling software with Claude. The goal is to have experts "tell Claude where it's wrong" and improve its scientific capabilities. This initiative is part of Anthropic’s broader strategy to strengthen its scientific ecosystem, following earlier programs like the AI Safety Fellows and AI for Science programs. The company acknowledges that current AI models, while powerful, still produce high-confidence errors and lack end-to-end research autonomy. The program aims to embed domain expertise directly into model development, turning scientists into "high-level reviewers" for AI. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has previously emphasized AI’s potential to accelerate scientific breakthroughs, particularly in biology and healthcare. The company believes that the next phase of AI competition will depend not on scaling parameters, but on integrating human expertise to refine model accuracy and reliability.

marsbit27m ago

Anthropic Starts Poaching Scientists? $27K Weekly Onsite Stipend to Fix Claude's Expert-Level Errors

marsbit27m ago

On the Eve of X Money's Launch, Musk Dismantles the Referee First

"X Money Launches After Dismantling Regulator: Musk's 9-Day Power Play" In February 2025, a team from the "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, entered the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) headquarters. Shortly after, the CFPB was effectively dismantled—its funding frozen, activities suspended, and nearly 90% of staff laid off. This move came just nine days after X announced a partnership with Visa and as X Money prepared to launch. The article contrasts this with the decade-long regulatory battles faced by companies like Coinbase and PayPal. Coinbase spent over $75 million in political contributions and endured a major SEC lawsuit to operate legally. PayPal complied with strict state and federal rules for its stablecoin PYUSD, including 100% reserve requirements and monthly audits. However, Musk’s approach was different. After the CFPB introduced a rule placing large digital payment apps under federal oversight, Musk tweeted "Delete CFPB." Within months, the rule was revoked by Congress. Meanwhile, DOGE operatives gained "god-tier" access to CFPB databases, potentially obtaining sensitive competitive information from rivals like Apple, Google, and PayPal. The article also highlights a "suspicious exemption clause" in the GENIUS Act, which allows private companies like X to issue stablecoins with fewer restrictions. Senator Elizabeth Warren questioned whether Musk, who was a senior presidential advisor during the Act’s drafting, influenced this clause. X Money offers a 6% APY on deposits, despite FDIC warnings that stablecoin users are not insured. As X Money launches to 600 million monthly users, the article questions the fairness of a system where Musk can bypass regulations that others spent years and millions to comply with. The dismantling of the CFPB and the alleged regulatory advantages raise concerns about the future of equitable rule-making in the U.S. financial system.

marsbit36m ago

On the Eve of X Money's Launch, Musk Dismantles the Referee First

marsbit36m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

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 S (S) are presented below.

活动图片