В марте 2025 года жертвы фишинга потеряли $6,37 млн

cryptonews.ruPublicado em 2024-11-02Última atualização em 2025-04-02

Фишинговые атаки в марте 2025 года привели к крупным потерям для держателей криптовалют. Они лишились $6,37 млн из-за действий мошенников. Всего за 30 дней исследователи Scam Sniffer зафиксировали 5992 пострадавших.

Несмотря на снижение общего количества жертв, киберпреступники продолжают атаковать владельцев крупных криптокошельков. Самая масштабная кража принесла преступникам $1,82 млн. В целом за 1-й квартал 2025 года убытки от фишинговых атак достигли $21,94 млн.

Крупнейшие случаи мартовских атак показывают, что злоумышленники используют различные методы. Наибольшие потери связаны с прямым переводом средств. Второй по величине способ — атаки через поддельное разрешение на перевод, из-за чего было похищено $553 тыс. Также зафиксированы инциденты с «отравлением адресов».

Если рассматривать динамику за 1-й квартал, то наблюдается снижение общего объема потерь. В январе пользователи лишились $10,25 млн, в феврале — $5,32 млн, а в марте — $6,37 млн. Однако эксперты отмечают, что атаки становятся более изощренными, и крупные держатели криптовалют остаются под угрозой.

Основные методы атак включают подделку разрешений, перехват адресов и использование социальной инженерии. Хакеры создают сайты-двойники и внедряют вредоносные ссылки, заставляя инвесторов совершать необдуманные переводы. Многие жертвы даже не осознают, что их кошельки были скомпрометированы, пока не становится слишком поздно.

Эксперты рекомендуют соблюдать строгие меры безопасности. Перед переводом средств необходимо несколько раз проверять адрес получателя. Важно использовать сервисы защиты от фишинга и никогда не совершать транзакции в спешке. Дополнительно рекомендуется активировать многофакторную аутентификацию и хранить крупные суммы на аппаратных кошельках.

Ошибка в тексте? Выделите её мышкой и нажмите Ctrl + Enter

Leituras Relacionadas

AI Folding: Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Are Becoming the Privilege of a Few

【AI Accessibility Gap Widens: Elite Tools Like Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Are Becoming Privileged】 We are witnessing a growing "AI divide." A stark reality is emerging: a tiny fraction of elites, primarily in tech, are using powerful next-generation models like Fable 5 or the upcoming GPT-5.6, while the vast majority of the public only has access to "toys" - free, limited models equivalent to ChatGPT's basic versions (8B to 30B parameters). This creates a massive experiential chasm and cognitive dissonance. Industry outsiders see AI as overhyped and ineffective, unable to grasp its transformative potential, while insiders leverage these advanced models for a decisive competitive edge. The gap isn't just about model quality but product functionality. Free users get a simple chatbot. Paying elites get integrated workflow systems—capable of creating specialized agents, processing complex data, and handling real-world tasks like management, coding, and planning. Demos showcasing AI planning weddings or building apps feel disconnected from everyday needs like managing bills, groceries, or health. The cost barrier is immense, with reports of engineers spending $1000 daily on Fable 5 inference. Elite users employ sophisticated multi-model workflows, combining different AIs for ideation, architecture, execution, and review, completing complex projects in minutes instead of weeks. This divide extends to critical areas like healthcare, where free models are dangerously unreliable for medical queries. However, some argue that for 90% of common business tasks, mid-tier models like GPT-5.5 are sufficient; the perceived limitation often stems from poor integration and lack of context, not model intelligence. Ultimately, unequal access to cutting-edge AI is creating a new form of social stratification, where the most powerful tools are becoming the exclusive privilege of a few.

marsbitHá 25m

AI Folding: Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Are Becoming the Privilege of a Few

marsbitHá 25m

Cathie Wood's June $77M Investment: Are Crypto Stocks a True 'Substitute' for Bitcoin?

In June, Cathie Wood's ARK Invest purchased $77 million worth of publicly traded crypto-related stocks, including Coinbase, Circle, and Bullish, during Bitcoin's worst monthly performance in four years. This aligns with the investment thesis that such stocks offer a compliant way to gain exposure to the crypto cycle without directly holding Bitcoin. However, data analysis reveals significant drawbacks. A group of nine U.S.-listed crypto companies showed 30-day annualized realized volatility between 68% and 90%, nearly double Bitcoin's 37.6%. Over 90 days, Circle's volatility reached 103.6% versus Bitcoin's 37.8%. Drawdowns were also more severe for stocks like Circle (-51.4%) and MicroStrategy (-48.6%) compared to Bitcoin's -36.4% from its January high. Correlation analysis shows most stocks share only a moderate link to Bitcoin. For example, Circle, Robinhood, and Bullish have a 90-day correlation coefficient of just 0.55–0.58 with BTC, meaning only about one-third of their price movement is explained by Bitcoin's action. The rest stems from company-specific risks: earnings, competition, fundraising, and equity dilution. MicroStrategy (MSTR) is the notable exception, acting as a leveraged Bitcoin proxy with a beta of 1.59 and 0.85 correlation. Coinbase offers relatively balanced exposure. Circle exemplifies "crypto-wrapped" corporate risk, with its recent crash tied to stablecoin competition, not Bitcoin. Robinhood's diversified business insulates it from crypto downturns but also limits upside. Bitcoin miners like RIOT and MARA have posted significant gains year-to-date, driven primarily by their pivot to AI compute services, not Bitcoin's price. The article highlights that investing in crypto stocks often means accepting amplified volatility or layering on business-specific risks absent from direct Bitcoin ownership. For instance, MicroStrategy's recent challenges—its market value falling below its Bitcoin holdings (mNAV <1) and facing potential Bitcoin sales for liquidity—demonstrate equity-specific hazards like dilution and financing pressures not faced by a direct Bitcoin holder. ARK's buying spree represents a bet on a basket of different business models with varying crypto exposure, not a simple, lower-risk substitute for holding Bitcoin.

marsbitHá 25m

Cathie Wood's June $77M Investment: Are Crypto Stocks a True 'Substitute' for Bitcoin?

marsbitHá 25m

Crypto Welcomes the 'July Rebound'? On-Chain Bottom Signals Align, Reversal Still Requires Breakthrough Above $70k

The cryptocurrency market is showing signs of a potential "July rebound," with Bitcoin leading a recovery above $63,000 and total market cap rising. This bounce is attributed to improved macro expectations (weaker US jobs data easing Fed hike fears), a short squeeze in derivatives, and signs of whale accumulation. Key on-chain metrics signal a potential bottom, including the Sharpe Ratio hitting extreme lows, the AHR999 index nearing historic buy zones, and miner pressure reaching significant levels. However, analysts caution this is likely a corrective rebound rather than a confirmed trend reversal. Persistent challenges include weak spot demand, negative Coinbase Premium indicating institutional caution, and ongoing selling pressure in the altcoin market. Market sentiment remains in "extreme fear" territory, and the AVIV ratio suggests the average active Bitcoin investor is still at a loss. For a true bullish reversal, Bitcoin needs to convincingly break above the key $70,000 level (aligned with the Short-Term Holder Realized Price). The path to a new parabolic bull market is seen as dependent on attracting substantially more capital, as capital efficiency has declined. While prices may be approaching a cyclical bottom zone (with estimates between $37k-$60k), the market requires more sustained positive signals for a definitive uptrend.

marsbitHá 56m

Crypto Welcomes the 'July Rebound'? On-Chain Bottom Signals Align, Reversal Still Requires Breakthrough Above $70k

marsbitHá 56m

‘Let’s finish the job’ – Senator Cynthia Lummis pushes CLARITY Act despite delay

The CLARITY Act, a key cryptocurrency market structure bill, missed its July 4 signing deadline. With Congress shifting focus to campaigning, the new target is August 7 before the summer recess. Senator Cynthia Lummis urged action, calling the act "this generation’s contribution" to American innovation. Proponents argue the bill would eliminate regulatory ambiguity, spur new products, and attract capital. Market sentiment remains cautiously optimistic, though prediction markets show approval odds dropping to 48%. Support comes from entities like the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, while the Major County Sheriffs of America shifted to a neutral stance. However, political hurdles remain, notably from former President Donald Trump's stance on prioritizing other legislation. The bill's fate is uncertain as lawmakers work to reconcile differences between committee versions ahead of the tight legislative window.

ambcryptoHá 59m

‘Let’s finish the job’ – Senator Cynthia Lummis pushes CLARITY Act despite delay

ambcryptoHá 59m

Is OUSD's 'List of Over a Hundred Companies' Actually Just an 'Expression of Interest'? Name-Borrowing Marketing Sparks Trust Crisis

A new stablecoin, Open USD (OUSD), was announced by Open Standard on June 30th, promising fee-free minting/redemption, shared reserve yield, and multi-party governance. Its launch was accompanied by a list of over 140 purported partners, including major names like Western Union, Ripple, and MetaMask, causing a significant drop in competitor Circle's stock price. However, the announcement quickly faced backlash. Several listed companies, including Samsung Electronics and South Korean financial firms, stated they had never formally agreed to participate, with some claiming they were merely contacted for exploratory discussions. Critics, including Circle's CEO, Jeremy Allaire,质疑了 OUSD's business model sustainability and governance, calling the partner list misleading "legitimacy-borrowing" for marketing. Despite the controversy, some firms like Stripe and Coinbase confirmed support and integration plans. The incident has sparked a trust crisis for OUSD before its official launch, highlighting the challenges of entering the established stablecoin market.

marsbitHá 1h

Is OUSD's 'List of Over a Hundred Companies' Actually Just an 'Expression of Interest'? Name-Borrowing Marketing Sparks Trust Crisis

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow