The post Over $740K stolen in new wave of Ethereum address poisoning attacks appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ethereum is facing another large-scale addressThe post Over $740K stolen in new wave of Ethereum address poisoning attacks appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ethereum is facing another large-scale address

Over $740K stolen in new wave of Ethereum address poisoning attacks

Ethereum is facing another large-scale address poisoning campaign. To date, thefts from private wallets have reached $740K. 

The Ethereum network is targeted by another address poisoning attack, spreading fake addresses to private wallets. Address poisoning includes fake tokens or dust from real assets, meant to disguise the wallet’s real history. Users who send to the last used address without double-checking will see their funds sent to the exploiter’s wallets. 

The attacks coincided with a period of low fees for Ethereum, allowing the attackers to make more dust transactions. Address poisoning attacks have also happened during high-fee periods, but the current campaign is among the larger ones. 

On-chain researcher Andrey Sergeenkov noticed the attack and connected it to Ethereum’s low fees at the moment. 

Ethereum made spam transactions cheap

The Fusaka update made spam transactions truly cheap, with regular ETH transfers under $0.01. As a result, following January 12, Ethereum saw a rapid inflow of new addresses, over three times the usual rate. 

As usual, the increased transactions were linked to stablecoins, which are one of the common types of tokens. However, Sergeenkov discovered over 67% of those stablecoin transactions were ‘dust’, a small amount of funds that could trace an address, or inject a poisoned address into a wallet’s history. 

Ethereum wallets flag some tokens, but dust transactions of legitimate stablecoins are not flagged as suspicious. 

The researcher flagged three originating addresses, which together sent spam transactions to over 1.5M wallets. 

Ethereum is still under attack from smart contract address

As of January 19, one of the flagged smart contracts, 0x301d9bc22d66f7bc49329a9d9eb16d3ecc4a12b4, had sent spam to over 589K wallets. 

The contract burned around 2.5 ETH in fees in the past 24 hours, and was among the top 10 busiest Ethereum contracts. 

One of the Ethereum spam contracts was among the top 10 gas burners, with other smaller contracts still actively sending out poisoned transactions. | Source: Ultrasound money

The contract ran a fundPoisoner function to spread tokens or ETH to thousands of intermediary addresses. Those addresses then funded user wallets with spam transactions. 

The latest wave of the attack reached 116 victims and took over $740K. The end results of poisoning attacks are unknown, as the user wallets may vary in their holdings. Recently, one user lost around $510K in a single address poisoning attack. The loss was linked to the recent total theft of the spam attack. 

The Ethereum team did not intentionally invite spam, but made it possible through its latest upgrade. While Ethereum activity is seen as bullish, some of the added transfers belonged to malicious spam. 

The current attack may not be over, with new contracts still active. Some of the attack smart contracts were flagged for spreading spam transactions. Another 78,000 wallets were dusted with fractions of stablecoins.

The recent research only took into account dust sent through stablecoins. A similar spam attack may still use fake tokens, low-value tokens, or other forms of dust. The best approach is to be aware of the potential risk and avoid copying addresses when sending an Ethereum transaction.

Sharpen your strategy with mentorship + daily ideas – 30 days free access to our trading program

Source: https://www.cryptopolitan.com/over-740k-stolen-in-new-wave-of-ethereum/

Market Opportunity
Dust Logo
Dust Price(DUST)
$0.0004124
$0.0004124$0.0004124
+0.36%
USD
Dust (DUST) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
Will XRP Price Increase In September 2025?

Will XRP Price Increase In September 2025?

Ripple XRP is a cryptocurrency that primarily focuses on building a decentralised payments network to facilitate low-cost and cross-border transactions. It’s a native digital currency of the Ripple network, which works as a blockchain called the XRP Ledger (XRPL). It utilised a shared, distributed ledger to track account balances and transactions. What Do XRP Charts Reveal? […]
Share
Tronweekly2025/09/18 00:00
China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

The post China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise China’s internet regulator has ordered the country’s biggest technology firms, including Alibaba and ByteDance, to stop purchasing Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D GPUs. According to the Financial Times, the move shuts down the last major channel for mass supplies of American chips to the Chinese market. Why Beijing Halted Nvidia Purchases Chinese companies had planned to buy tens of thousands of RTX Pro 6000D accelerators and had already begun testing them in servers. But regulators intervened, halting the purchases and signaling stricter controls than earlier measures placed on Nvidia’s H20 chip. Image: Nvidia An audit compared Huawei and Cambricon processors, along with chips developed by Alibaba and Baidu, against Nvidia’s export-approved products. Regulators concluded that Chinese chips had reached performance levels comparable to the restricted U.S. models. This assessment pushed authorities to advise firms to rely more heavily on domestic processors, further tightening Nvidia’s already limited position in China. China’s Drive Toward Tech Independence The decision highlights Beijing’s focus on import substitution — developing self-sufficient chip production to reduce reliance on U.S. supplies. “The signal is now clear: all attention is focused on building a domestic ecosystem,” said a representative of a leading Chinese tech company. Nvidia had unveiled the RTX Pro 6000D in July 2025 during CEO Jensen Huang’s visit to Beijing, in an attempt to keep a foothold in China after Washington restricted exports of its most advanced chips. But momentum is shifting. Industry sources told the Financial Times that Chinese manufacturers plan to triple AI chip production next year to meet growing demand. They believe “domestic supply will now be sufficient without Nvidia.” What It Means for the Future With Huawei, Cambricon, Alibaba, and Baidu stepping up, China is positioning itself for long-term technological independence. Nvidia, meanwhile, faces…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:37