ZachXBT flags suspected Trust Wallet extension issue as users report drained funds

ambcrypto发布于2025-12-25更新于2025-12-25

文章摘要

Security concerns emerged around the Trust Wallet browser extension on December 25, after blockchain investigator ZachXBT flagged suspicious activity potentially linked to a recent update. Reports suggest a supply-chain compromise may have been introduced in a December 24 update, where newly added code could silently exfiltrate sensitive wallet data—particularly during seed phrase imports—leading to immediate fund draining. Multiple users reported losses, with unverified estimates exceeding $2 million. The malicious code allegedly sent data to a recently registered external domain mimicking Trust Wallet infrastructure. The issue appears limited to the browser extension, with no evidence of mobile app compromise. Trust Wallet has not yet issued an official response or advisory. Researchers emphasize the situation remains under investigation, warning users to avoid importing seed phrases into the extension until clarified. If confirmed, this would represent a significant supply-chain attack.

Security concerns have emerged around the Trust Wallet browser extension on 25 December, after blockchain investigator ZachXBT flagged suspicious activity potentially linked to a recent update, prompting warnings from developers and security-focused accounts.

According to posts circulating on X, the issue may stem from a suspected supply-chain compromise introduced in a 24 December browser extension update.

Newly added code within the extension could silently exfiltrate sensitive wallet data when users import a seed phrase. The claims suggest that this has led to immediate wallet draining.

Alleged Trust Wallet malicious code and data exfiltration claims

Developers examining the extension allege that a JavaScript file added in the update contains logic disguised as analytics.

The code is said to activate specifically when a seed phrase is imported. It then silently transmits wallet-related data to an external domain designed to resemble official Trust Wallet infrastructure.

The domain referenced in the reports was reportedly registered only days ago and has since gone offline.

Researchers argue that its recent creation and the timing of the extension update raise concerns about a coordinated supply-chain attack rather than user-side phishing.

Users report wallet drains following seed imports

Multiple users have reported wallets being drained shortly after importing seed phrases into the Trust Wallet browser extension.

Publicly shared estimates suggest that more than $2 million may have been lost. Although these figures have not been independently verified.

Analysts indicate that funds were routed through multiple addresses, a pattern more commonly associated with automated exploitation than isolated user error.

Scope appears limited to browser extension

At this stage, there is no indication that Trust Wallet’s mobile applications are affected.

The warnings circulating online are focused specifically on the browser extension. This is where update mechanisms and third-party dependencies present higher supply-chain risk.

Users are advised not to import seed phrases into the Trust Wallet browser extension until further clarification is provided.

No official response from Trust Wallet yet

As of the time of writing, Trust Wallet has not issued any public response, clarification, or security advisory addressing the allegations.

There has been no confirmation or denial of the claims, nor any announcement of an extension, rollback, or emergency patch.

Investigation ongoing

Researchers have emphasized that the situation remains under active investigation. Conclusions should not be drawn until the extension code and related on-chain activity have been fully reviewed.

If confirmed, the incident would represent a serious supply-chain compromise.

This is a class of attack that differs significantly from phishing or user-side mistakes. Also, it has historically resulted in rapid, large-scale losses across the crypto ecosystem.


Final Thoughts

  • The allegations point to a potentially serious supply-chain risk affecting wallet extensions, underscoring how code updates can become a critical attack vector if compromised.
  • With no response yet from Trust Wallet, users and researchers are left relying on independent investigation as scrutiny around the incident continues.

相关问答

QWhat security concern was flagged by ZachXBT regarding the Trust Wallet browser extension?

AZachXBT flagged suspicious activity potentially linked to a recent update of the Trust Wallet browser extension, suggesting it could be a supply-chain compromise that leads to the silent exfiltration of sensitive wallet data and immediate draining of funds.

QHow does the suspected malicious code in the Trust Wallet extension allegedly operate?

AThe malicious JavaScript code, added in an update and disguised as analytics, is said to activate when a user imports a seed phrase. It then silently transmits wallet-related data to an external domain designed to look like official Trust Wallet infrastructure.

QWhat is the estimated financial impact based on user reports, and how were the funds moved?

APublicly shared estimates suggest that more than $2 million may have been lost, though this is unverified. Analysts indicate the funds were routed through multiple addresses, a pattern associated with automated exploitation rather than isolated user error.

QAre Trust Wallet's mobile applications also affected by this suspected compromise?

ANo, there is no indication that Trust Wallet’s mobile applications are affected. The warnings are specifically focused on the browser extension, which has higher supply-chain risk due to its update mechanisms and third-party dependencies.

QWhat is the current status of Trust Wallet's official response to these allegations?

AAs of the time the article was written, Trust Wallet had not issued any public response, clarification, or security advisory addressing the allegations. There has been no confirmation, denial, or announcement of an emergency patch.

你可能也喜欢

帕克·刘易斯解释为何比特币仍是最佳货币

知名比特币分析师帕克·刘易斯在访谈中批评了某些上市公司以“数字信贷”形式销售永续优先股的营销策略,认为这从根本上扭曲了比特币的本质。他指出,比特币在算法层面不具备法币收益性,承诺定期分红主要依赖牛市吸引新投资者来维持,风险极高。 刘易斯引用数据说明此类衍生品的巨大风险:全球信贷市场规模达300万亿美元,而永续优先股市场仅约1万亿美元,这表明机构有意规避这种无还款期限的资产,将风险转嫁给信息不足的散户。 针对“比特币波动性太大”的常见观点,他认为波动性是这一供应量严格受限的新资产被大规模采用过程中的自然数学结果。新人入场需出更高价从早期持有者手中购买,导致价格剧烈波动。他建议投资者直接持有比特币,这比投资MicroStrategy等公司发行的衍生品更安全。 投资者将焦点从直接持有加密货币转向公司衍生品,会忽视法币急速贬值的真正威胁。刘易斯以自创的“肋眼牛排指数”为例,指出其本地超市一款牛排价格从2020年的19.99美元涨至37.99美元,反映年化约12-13%的真实通胀,远超官方平滑后的CPI数据。 在全球通胀环境下,最明智、保守且安全的策略仍是直接持有比特币并完全掌控私钥。追逐加密货币国库股等公司工具的收益只会叠加隐性系统风险,而理解去中心化货币的本质才能有效保护财富免受宏观经济动荡影响。

cryptonews.ru3小时前

帕克·刘易斯解释为何比特币仍是最佳货币

cryptonews.ru3小时前

比特币为何在美联储强硬暂停后守住 64,000 美元关口

比特币在美联储暂停加息后维持在64,000美元附近,结束了7月的交易。市场对美联储维持利率不变的决定反应剧烈,但并未获得政策即将转向的明确信号。在此背景下,资金重新流入比特币现货ETF,加密货币总市值保持在2.29万亿美元左右,主要山寨币走势分化。 投资者目前处于观望状态。一方面,高利率和美联储的强硬立场抑制了风险偏好;另一方面,市场未出现恐慌性抛售、比特币ETF恢复资金净流入以及关键价位的韧性表明,数字资产市场尚未准备好大幅下跌。 **关键信息:** - 美联储维持利率在3.50%-3.75%,投票结果为9:3,三位委员支持加息。 - 比特币现货ETF净流入3210万美元,结束了连续流出;以太坊ETF则净流出约1865万美元。 - 比特币在63,000-66,000美元区间内盘整,63,000-63,500美元构成支撑,66,000美元是近期阻力。 - 以太坊价格在1,900美元附近承压,但其网络基本面(如质押意愿)保持稳定。 - 资金在主要加密货币间轮动,比特币重获机构青睐,Solana相关产品也有资金流入。 - 美国CLARITY Act法案审议被推迟至秋季,降低了其在2026年内通过的可能性。 技术层面,比特币能否在63,000美元上方保持稳固、以太坊能否守住1,860美元以及机构资金流入能否持续,被视为市场能否在2026年下半年构筑复苏基础的关键信号。

cryptonews.ru3小时前

比特币为何在美联储强硬暂停后守住 64,000 美元关口

cryptonews.ru3小时前

交易

现货
活动图片