ReportedfreezeClaim 153
Another count dates the first freezes at 21:14.
Reviewer note: Hacken does not name the source of the alternative count.
Hacken said that another count dates the first freezes at 21:14, whereas its table lists Tether's freeze at 21:01.
This line is our short summary of the quote below. The quote is the evidence.
On the timeline
Other claims from the same source
ReportedamountClaim 399
Hacken said an attacker emptied Binance hot wallets on 10 blockchains on the evening of 29 October 2026.
an attacker emptied Binance hot wallets on 10 blockchains
Reportedroot causeClaim 326
Hacken, quoting investigators, said the most likely explanation is that the attacker gained the ability to make Binance's hot wallet signing system sign transactions of its choosing across chains.
The most likely explanation is that the attacker gained the ability to make Binance's hot wallet signing system sign transactions of its choosing across chains.
Reportedroot causeClaim 325
Hacken said early signs on Ethereum pointed to phishing of the authorizations, which could explain Ethereum but none of the other chains.
Early signs on Ethereum pointed to phishing of the authorizations, which could explain Ethereum but none of the other chains.
ReportedotherClaim 324
Hacken recommended that wallet operators cap value and rate per wallet at the signer and hold new destinations for a second approval.
Cap value and rate per wallet at the signer and hold new destinations for a second approval
Reportedroot causeClaim 323
Hacken said Binance's statement that no private key leaked and investigators' view that Binance's signing system signed for the attacker can both be true.
Binance says it found no evidence that a private key leaked, while investigators say Binance's signing system signed for the attacker, and the two statements can both be true.