Ethereum Co-founder’s Twitter Hacked: $691,000 Losses in Deceptive Link

After gaining unauth­orized access to the X account (formerly Twitter) of Ethereum co-fo­under Vitalik Buterin, indiv­iduals repor­tedly suffered significant financial losses. These losses exceeded $691,000 and were incurred due to a deceptive link that falsely claimed to offer a compli­mentary NFT.

According to reports, Vitalik Buterin, one of Ether­eum’s co-fou­nders, reported experiencing a security breach on his X (formerly Twitter) account. This unfor­tunate incident resulted in a colle­ctive loss exceeding $691,000 among indiv­iduals who clicked on a malicious link, as stated by block­chain invest­igator ZachX­BT.

On platform X, a post dated September 9th reveals Dmitry Buterin’s announ­cement regarding his son’s compr­omised account. In this update, he urges readers to disregard the previous post because Vitalik’s account was breached. Dmitry reassures everyone that Vitalik is actively working towards regaining access.

The mentioned post has been removed since then. Initi­ally, it was shared on Buterin’s profile to announce the introduction of ‘Proto-Dan­ksharding’ to Ethereum, a cause for celebr­ation.

The hacker spread a harmful link, prete­nding to offer a free commem­orative nonfu­ngible token (NFT), tricking potential victims into conne­cting their wallets. However, the intention was to steal all their funds.

As a result of this incident, Ethereum developer Bok Khoo, known by the moniker Bokky Poobah on X, has claimed financial losses in his Crypt­oPunk NFT portfo­lio.

According to the publi­cation date, the minimum price for a Crypt­oPunk NFT is 46.99 Ether, approximately $76,837.

Challenging The Notion Of Ethereum SIM Swap: ZachXBT’s Perspective

ZachXBT has been dilig­ently updating his 438,200 followers about the hacker’s actions. Recently, he revealed that the highest NFT stolen so far is Crypt­oPunk #3983. This rare artwork is valued at 153.62 ETH, approximately $250,543.

Satoshi 767, a user on platform X, raised concerns about the adequacy of Buterin’s security measures for his X account. According to Satoshi 767, it is possible that insufficient preca­utions were

He reluc­tantly pointed out the need for Vitalik to acknowledge his lack of proper opera­tional security and consider compen­sating those affected. The statement implied that Buterin’s oversight was responsible for the attack.

The situation where Vitalik cannot be considered negligent is if someone from the X organization compr­omised the account inter­nally or if he was physi­cally coerced by a criminal who threa­tened violence. However, it seems highly impro­bable that such events took place. It is more likely that this incident can be attributed to a SIM swap.

However, ZachXBT disputed these allega­tions. He argued that Buterin’s prominent position exposed him to potential hacking attempts in numerous ways.

ZachXBT contended whether a SIM swap had occurred at this stage was uncertain. Consi­dering Vitalik’s prominent status, there exists a potential for an inside indiv­idual being bribed or some form of manipu­lation being utilized.

Related Reading | LBRY’s Blockchain Battle: A Resurgent Fight Against SEC Ruling

“The author’s views are for reference only and shall not constitute any investment advice. Please ensure you fully understand and assess the products and associated risks before purchasing.”