Cc9f267dcNews eventClaimCoinDCX stated that it credited all affected user deposit accounts for operational losses from a failed deposit-sweeping process, and that active customer funds remain safe in cold walletsAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX deprecated deposit wallet addresses created in January 2025 following a security incident in July 2025AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimIndian cryptocurrency exchange CoinDCX initially denied that its active wallets were compromised following reportings of approximately $16 million in suspicious outflows on October 21, 2026AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX updated CEO Sumit Gupta's earlier denial of a breach on October 22, 2026, acknowledging operational losses caused by a failed deposit-sweeping process from deprecated wallet addressesAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX suffered a security incident in July 2025 resulting in the loss of approximately $44 million, which security firm Cyvers attributed to the Lazarus GroupAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimBlockchain investigator ZachXBT challenged CoinDCX's initial breach denial, alleging that deprecated deposit address TQKJQ remained active for 10 months following the July 2025 hackAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX CEO Sumit Gupta initially stated on October 22, 2026 that about $16 million in reported suspicious outflows involved old addresses compromised in July 2025 and were unrelated to current operationsAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimZachXBT alleged that CoinDCX deposit address TQKJQ swept user deposits to CoinDCX's public hot wallet and received gas funding as recently as April and May 2026AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX did not disclose the exact monetary size of the operational losses it absorbed from the failed deposit-sweeping process disclosed on October 22, 2026AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX stated that despite customer notifications to stop using deprecated deposit addresses after July 2025, some users continued sending cryptocurrency to themAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimCoinDCX reported that a temporary failure in its automated process for sweeping deposits from deprecated addresses caused operational losses that were discovered on October 22, 2026AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimThe SP1 soundness flaw affected native Rust verification in sp1_hypercube, sp1_prover, and sp1_sdk versions 6.0.0 through 6.8.0AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimA high-severity soundness bug in Succinct's SP1 zero-knowledge proving system exposed Succinct's mainnet Prover Network to invalid execution proofs from third-party proversAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimSecurity firm Blockaid warned that the X100 governance takeover attack launched on October 24, 2026 on the Ethereum network was ongoingAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimThe X100 protocol governance takeover attack on October 24, 2026 targeted assets held on the Ethereum blockchain, liquidating liquidity pools and treasury reservesAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimSuccinct deployed the version 6.8.1 patch for SP1's soundness bug to the mainnet Prover Network, requiring no configuration changes from users requesting network proofsAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimAn attacker could exploit SP1 by supplying proof data with mismatched size labels, causing the native Rust verifier to accept an invalid proofAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimSuccinct stated in GitHub security advisory GHSA-p7v2-jjv3-8p8f that its mainnet Prover Network was the only known deployment affected by a high-severity soundness bug in SP1's proving systemAgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimSuccinct advised users running native Rust verifiers in SP1 who accept proofs from untrusted provers to upgrade their software to version 6.8.1AgreeDisagree
Cc9f267dcClaimSuccinct released version 6.8.1, which patched a high-severity soundness bug in SP1, on September 24, 2026, 17 days before publishing GitHub security advisory GHSA-p7v2-jjv3-8p8f on October 11, 2026AgreeDisagree