An Ethereum user lost 4,556 ETH, worth $12.4M, after copying a poisoned address that mimicked a Galaxy Digital deposit wallet. An Ethereum user has lost 4,556 ETHAn Ethereum user lost 4,556 ETH, worth $12.4M, after copying a poisoned address that mimicked a Galaxy Digital deposit wallet. An Ethereum user has lost 4,556 ETH

$12.4M Gone: Ethereum Whale Tricked by Fake Galaxy Address

3 min read

An Ethereum user lost 4,556 ETH, worth $12.4M, after copying a poisoned address that mimicked a Galaxy Digital deposit wallet.

An Ethereum user has lost 4,556 ETH, valued at about $12.4 million, after sending funds to a fake address.

The transfer occurred after the user copied an address from transaction history, believing it belonged to Galaxy Digital.

Blockchain data shows the loss resulted from an address poisoning tactic rather than a protocol failure.

How the Address Poisoning Took Place

According to Lookonchain, the affected wallet, identified as 0xd674, had a history of sending funds to Galaxy Digital and regularly used the same deposit address, making its transaction pattern easy to observe on-chain.

An attacker created a lookalike Ethereum address with the same first and last four characters.

This method is known as address poisoning. The attacker then sent small dust transactions to the victim’s wallet.

These dust transfers appeared in the victim’s transaction history. When the user later copied an address from that history, the wrong address was selected.

The copied address belonged to the attacker, not Galaxy Digital.

The Transfer That Led to the Loss

About 11 hours before the loss was identified, the victim attempted another Ethereum deposit.

The user copied the address directly from past transactions. The action was intended to save time.

Instead, the copied address was the attacker’s poisoned address. Once confirmed on the network, the transaction became final. A total of 4,556 ETH was sent in a single transfer.

Blockchain records show the funds moved directly to the attacker’s wallet. There was no contract interaction or system error. The transaction followed standard Ethereum rules.

Why Address Poisoning Is Hard to Detect

Ethereum addresses are long and difficult to read. Many users check only the first and last characters. Attackers exploit this habit when creating fake addresses.

Transaction history often appears trustworthy. However, it can include unsolicited transfers from unknown sources.

These entries can mislead users who copy addresses without full verification.

Security tools can reduce risk, but user behavior remains critical. Hardware wallets, address books, and manual checks can help. Still, mistakes can happen during routine actions.

Ongoing Risks for Crypto Users

Address poisoning has increased as on-chain activity grows. Public transaction data allows attackers to study wallet behavior. Repeated transfers to the same address can increase exposure.

Exchanges and custodians often publish deposit addresses. Users may reuse these addresses for convenience. This practice can create predictable patterns visible to attackers.

The incident shows how small actions can carry large financial consequences. Ethereum transactions are irreversible once confirmed. The network processes instructions exactly as submitted.

Related Reading: ETH Holds $2,680 After Liquidation Flush-Key Levels Traders Are Watching

Broader Context of User Security

The Ethereum network functioned as designed during the transfer. There was no breach of Galaxy Digital systems. The loss occurred at the user level.

Security experts continue to warn against copying addresses from transaction history. Verifying the full address before sending remains essential. Bookmarking trusted addresses can also help.

As on-chain activity expands, similar cases continue to appear. The incident involving wallet 0xd674 adds to growing awareness of address poisoning risks.

The post $12.4M Gone: Ethereum Whale Tricked by Fake Galaxy Address appeared first on Live Bitcoin News.

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 service@support.mexc.com 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

Top Altcoins To Hold Before 2026 For Maximum ROI – One Is Under $1!

Top Altcoins To Hold Before 2026 For Maximum ROI – One Is Under $1!

BlockchainFX presale surges past $7.5M at $0.024 per token with 500x ROI potential, staking rewards, and BLOCK30 bonus still live — top altcoin to hold before 2026.
Share
Blockchainreporter2025/09/18 01:16
UBS CEO Targets Direct Crypto Access With “Fast Follower” Tokenization Strategy

UBS CEO Targets Direct Crypto Access With “Fast Follower” Tokenization Strategy

The tension in UBS’s latest strategy update is not between profit and innovation, but between speed and control. On February 4, 2026, as the bank reported a record
Share
Ethnews2026/02/05 04:56
Cryptos Signal Divergence Ahead of Fed Rate Decision

Cryptos Signal Divergence Ahead of Fed Rate Decision

The post Cryptos Signal Divergence Ahead of Fed Rate Decision appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Crypto assets send conflicting signals ahead of the Federal Reserve’s September rate decision. On-chain data reveals a clear decrease in Bitcoin and Ethereum flowing into centralized exchanges, but a sharp increase in altcoin inflows. The findings come from a Tuesday report by CryptoQuant, an on-chain data platform. The firm’s data shows a stark divergence in coin volume, which has been observed in movements onto centralized exchanges over the past few weeks. Bitcoin and Ethereum Inflows Drop to Multi-Month Lows Sponsored Sponsored Bitcoin has seen a dramatic drop in exchange inflows, with the 7-day moving average plummeting to 25,000 BTC, its lowest level in over a year. The average deposit per transaction has fallen to 0.57 BTC as of September. This suggests that smaller retail investors, rather than large-scale whales, are responsible for the recent cash-outs. Ethereum is showing a similar trend, with its daily exchange inflows decreasing to a two-month low. CryptoQuant reported that the 7-day moving average for ETH deposits on exchanges is around 783,000 ETH, the lowest in two months. Other Altcoins See Renewed Selling Pressure In contrast, other altcoin deposit activity on exchanges has surged. The number of altcoin deposit transactions on centralized exchanges was quite steady in May and June of this year, maintaining a 7-day moving average of about 20,000 to 30,000. Recently, however, that figure has jumped to 55,000 transactions. Altcoins: Exchange Inflow Transaction Count. Source: CryptoQuant CryptoQuant projects that altcoins, given their increased inflow activity, could face relatively higher selling pressure compared to BTC and ETH. Meanwhile, the balance of stablecoins on exchanges—a key indicator of potential buying pressure—has increased significantly. The report notes that the exchange USDT balance, around $273 million in April, grew to $379 million by August 31, marking a new yearly high. CryptoQuant interprets this surge as a reflection of…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:01