Crypto Hack Losses Jump 46% in 2025: SlowMist Report

TheNewsCryptoОпубліковано о 2025-12-31Востаннє оновлено о 2025-12-31

Анотація

In 2025, crypto hack losses surged by 46% to $2.935 billion compared to $2.013 billion in 2024, despite a significant drop in the number of incidents from 410 to 200. The DeFi sector remained the most targeted, with 126 security incidents resulting in $649 million in losses. A major hack on centralized exchange Bybit alone accounted for $1.46 billion of the total $1.809 billion lost in CEX breaches. Phishing attacks became more sophisticated and harder to detect. Notably, $387 million of the stolen funds were recovered or frozen across 18 incidents.

SlowMist, a blockchain security firm, has recently released its 2025 Blockchain Security and AML Annual Report. The report vigorously mentioned the various security challenges the crypto industry faced over the year.

As per the report, the total value stolen from crypto hacks increased by around 46% in 2025 as compared to 2024. It is important to note that crypto theft had been more destructive by the first half of this year than in 2024.

Chainalysis also released a report this year that mentioned that this year showed a significantly steeper trajectory into the end of the first half than any events that occurred in the previous years.

Till now, this year’s security incidents have resulted in $2.935 billion, which was $2.013 billion in losses in 2024. Although the number of incidents has dropped since last year, the total amount of losses increased, indicating a trend of fewer but large-scale scams.

The single incident leading to massive loss

In 2025, there were a total of 200 cases, which in 2024 stood at 410 cases. The DeFi sector was the most targeted sector, with 126 security cases, which equalled about 63% of all hacks and total losses of about $649 million. This shows a 37% and 67% decrease from last year’s incident, which stood at 339, resulting in $1.029 billion.

At the same time, centralised exchange (CEX) platforms noted 22 incidents accounting for $1.809 billion in losses as a result of the Bybit hack. This was the single incident that resulted in a massive loss of $1.46 billion.

However, phishing was one of the most active schemes evolving in 2025, as per the SlowMist. Also, the scams have become very difficult to detect, as malicious actors are not relying on a single method of attack to deceive victims.

Furthermore, there were 18 incidents in this year in which the lost funds were recovered or frozen. These cases resulted in taking the total stolen funds to $1.95 billion, of which around $387 million was successfully returned or frozen.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

BitMine Expands ETH Treasury With $352M Staking Push

TagsCrypto HackHackphishing

Пов'язані питання

QAccording to the SlowMist report, what was the percentage increase in the total value stolen from crypto hacks in 2025 compared to 2024?

AThe total value stolen from crypto hacks increased by around 46% in 2025 compared to 2024.

QWhich sector was the most targeted by security incidents in 2025, and what percentage of all hacks did it represent?

AThe DeFi sector was the most targeted, representing about 63% of all hacks.

QWhat was the single largest security incident mentioned in the report and how much was lost in that event?

AThe single largest incident was the Bybit hack, which resulted in a massive loss of $1.46 billion.

QDespite a decrease in the number of incidents, why did the total amount of losses increase in 2025?

AThe total amount of losses increased because the industry saw a trend of fewer but large-scale scams.

QHow much in stolen funds was successfully recovered or frozen in 2025 according to the report?

AApproximately $387 million in stolen funds was successfully returned or frozen in 2025.

Пов'язані матеріали

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit41 хв тому

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit41 хв тому

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbit54 хв тому

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbit54 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片