From ‘No Breach’ to $15.99M lost: Crypto exchange CoinDCX faces backlash after shifting story

Indian crypto exchange CoinDCX has finally acknowledged the loss of $15.99 million from July’s 2025 cyberattack. The confirmation came three days after blockchain investigator ZachXBT first reported the suspected theft.

This delayed acknowledgment is what has triggered backlash against the exchange.

As AMBCrypto previously reported, CoinDCX co-founder Sumit Gupta had initially denied allegations that active wallets on the exchange had been breached, one day after they were highlighted by blockchain sleuth, ZachXBT.

However, the change in narrative from ‘no breach’ to confirming losses of $15.99 million has led to questions over how the exchange managed the situation and communicated it to its users.

Crypto exchange blames failed wallet sweeps as user trust takes a hit

CoinDCX is attributing the loss to a failed internal wallet-transfer process.

As noted in the post, the crypto exchange explained how some users still sent money to these deprecated addresses after the exchange deprecated them following the hack in 2025.

However, the exchange credited the funds to their portfolios as soon as they arrived. But the subsequent transfer to CoinDCX’s main wallet failed, causing $15.99 million in funds to accumulate in the deprecated wallets.

Citing the failed wallet-sweeping process as the main reason for the delay, CoinDCX said:

It took us some time to do the thorough review of the deprecated infrastructure and confirm the sequence of events. We could have been more proactive, but we shared this update as soon as we had the complete picture.

However, this has done little to help rebuild user confidence, some of whom have taken to social media to point out its issues. The main issue seems to be that while CoinDCX has confirmed that they lost $15.99 million, they have not explained exactly how the breach happened or why the old wallets were operational.

So, until these questions are addressed, concerns around the crypto exchange’s security and transparency are likely to persist.

Final Summary