Data Leak? Crypto.com Fires Back At ‘Unfounded’ Allegations

bitcoinist發佈於 2025-09-22更新於 2025-09-22

文章摘要

According to Bloomberg and several other news outlets, Crypto.com has pushed back against a report that a 2023 breach exposed...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

According to Bloomberg and several other news outlets, Crypto.com has pushed back against a report that a 2023 breach exposed user details and was kept from authorities.

The story centers on a hacking group known as Scattered Spider and a young suspect who, according to reports, used phishing and social engineering to access an employee account. Crypto.com says the claims that it hid the incident are “unfounded.”

Company Statement And Regulators

Crypto.com’s leadership has said the incident was reported to regulators at the time. CEO Kris Marszalek and company spokespeople told reporters that the breach affected a “very small number of individuals,” involved limited personally identifiable information (PII), and did not put customer funds at risk.

Based on reports, the firm says it notified US regulators and relevant jurisdictional authorities about the matter in 2023. The company called any suggestion of a cover-up misinformation.

Crypto.com: What Reporters Found About The Hack

Bloomberg’s investigation names Scattered Spider and one alleged member, 18-year-old Noah Urban, as central to the operation. Reports say the attackers used social engineering and phishing to trick an employee into giving access, and that the intrusion happened sometime before early 2023.

Multiple outlets repeated Bloomberg’s account, while some pieces added details about the group’s past campaigns against major companies. Crypto.com confirmed a limited breach but disputed claims that the company intentionally withheld the event from regulators.

As of today, the market cap of cryptocurrencies stood at $3.83 trillion. Chart: TradingView

Critics And Investigators React

On-chain investigator ZachXBT publicly criticized Crypto.com after the reporting, arguing the exchange should have made the incident public and notified affected users directly.

Other security watchers said the crypto industry needs clearer standards about when exchanges must disclose breaches to the public versus regulators. Reports have disclosed conflicting timelines about when regulators were told and when any affected customers were informed, leaving several questions unsettled.

Unanswered Questions And Immediate Impact

The number of users affected remains unknown, and the exact data fields involved — passport scans, phone numbers, or email addresses — have not been detailed in public documents.

Crypto.com maintains that no funds were taken. No independent forensic reports or full third-party audits confirming the scope have been made public.

That lack of clarity has prompted calls from the community for greater transparency and formal confirmation from outside experts.

Featured image from Woden Valley Plumbing, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

你可能也喜歡

您会惊讶地发现,WeChat 和 Telegram 在架构层面竟如此不同

微信与Telegram在架构层面有着根本性的差异,主要体现在数据存储、功能设计和生态开放度上。 **数据存储方式**:Telegram提供无限云端存储,所有消息历史在各设备间自动同步。微信则采用本地存储,消息在服务器交付后不保留,因此更换设备需通过特定功能迁移,且桌面版必须依赖手机在线确认才能登录。 **功能设计差异**:在频道讨论方面,Telegram为帖子自动关联评论区,实现一体化讨论。微信的公众号文章评论需经发布者审核才可显示,缺乏与文章直接关联的讨论系统,用户交流需跳转至聊天或小程序。文件传输上,Telegram支持最大2-4GB的文件,微信则限制为200MB,大文件需借助“文件传输助手”或第三方服务。 **开发与生态**:Telegram的Bot API完全开放免费,开发门槛低。微信小程序生态庞大(活跃数量超480万),但属于封闭系统,需经过审核、认证,甚至提供商业许可才能使用部分API,准入要求更高。 **支付整合**:微信支付深度融入中国日常生活,覆盖绝大多数线下场景及公共服务,替代了现金和银行应用。Telegram没有内置的法定货币支付系统,主要通过第三方机器人实现支付功能,尤其侧重加密货币,这反映了其去中心化理念,但在传统金融基础设施完善的地区,限制了其作为日常金融工具的应用。 **安全考量**:文章未深入讨论加密机制。Telegram提供端到端加密的私密聊天选项,而微信聊天信息不采用端到端加密。值得注意的是,微信将通讯与支付高度集成于单一界面,理论上扩大了潜在的攻击面。有数据显示,仅2025年初新加坡就记录了数百起涉及仿冒微信等支付平台员工的诈骗案件,损失巨大。这引出一个技术问题:当通讯与支付功能在同一个应用内结合得越紧密,聊天安全漏洞可能带来的代价就越高。 总结而言,两者代表了不同的平台哲学:微信构建了一个深度融入现实经济的封闭但高度集成的生态系统;而Telegram则围绕开放协议、灵活数据存储和低开发者门槛进行设计。这种架构选择决定了各自的目标用户和使用场景。

cryptonews.ru10 分鐘前

您会惊讶地发现,WeChat 和 Telegram 在架构层面竟如此不同

cryptonews.ru10 分鐘前

交易

現貨
活动图片