Connect with us

Ethereum

MyEtherWallet.com has been reportedly hacked – 215 Ethereum [ETH] phished in less than 3 hours

Prerana Sarkar

Published

on

MyEtherWallet.com has been hacked
Source: Pixabay

MyEtherWallet.com [MEW] has been hacked on Google Public DNC. The news came into limelight after a Reddit user posted asking everyone to switch off their google public DNC {8.8.8.8/ 8.8.4.4} as it has been compromised. The DNC server is settling to a bad server that could steal the user’s key.

The hacker has phished around 215 ETH in the past two and a half hours from various wallets and transferred all the money to another account. The account has been closed as Google has resolved the DNS to the current IPS.

Hijackers account - Stolen 215 Ether

Hijackers account – Stolen 215 Ether

Users are advised to check if the connection is secured on their browser to avoid a phishing from taking place.

Micky's explanation of the hack

Micky’s explanation of the hack

MyEtherWallet is an open-source client-side interface. MEW allows users to interact with the blockchain directly without losing control over their keys and funds.

Michael, a Reddit User says:

“MEW suddenly switched from the CloudFront CDN to one Russian IP address. I’d be careful until more information is revealed.”

The official website, on entry, states:

Polezo, another Reddit user says:

“This type of attack is not unique to crypto. DNS hijacking has happened to banks as well. Even local versions of Google, Paypal and Microsoft have been hijacked before.”

Pegcity says:

“THIS is why crypto is still bullshit for adoption. How can the average person possibly be expected to use any of this garbage, we are still a long, long way off.”

Another Reddit user says:

“I believe the worst that can happen is they misdirect your payment to their own address, which would appear on your device for confirmation”

Worric CS says:

“Holy shit it’s really happening. Already looked very suspicious when I just opened mew in chrome on android, big warning message which states the certificate is invalid and the connection insecure.”

Ruined Amnesia says:

“And this is one of the major things holding crypto back, how would you feel to wake up every day and have to check your account hoping it hasn’t been hacked and it’s just a sitting duck. There really needs to be a lot more security with these things that is simple to use before it will really take off.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter




Follow us on Telegram | Twitter | Facebook



Prerana Sarkar is a part of AMBCrypto's News Reporting Team from January 2018. She is a Journalism major from Mount Carmel with two years of writing experience in Bitcoin and Blockchain related articles. Prerana does not hold any value in cryptocurrency or its projects

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Coin Metrics data reveals inaccuracies in Kik’s claim of being as dominant as BTC, ETH blockchains

Avatar

Published

on

Source: Pixabay

Upon investigating Kik’s claims in response to SEC’s lawsuit filed earlier this month, CoinMetric data reported inconsistencies in the on-chain activity and adoption rate of its native token, Kin.

In a study dubbed, “An Analysis of Kin’s On-Chain Activity,” the crypto-asset elaborated on the two assertions made by Kik in its letter to the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

Kik’s first claim was regarding its blockchain activity. Its in-house token, Kin, supposedly exceeded Ether and Bitcoin to record the fifth highest daily blockchain activity. This was debunked by CoinMetric’s investigation after taking into account its “Operation Count” [the same metric used by Kik to support their claim] and “Transfer Value.”

In terms of the Operation Count, the report explained,

“According to Kik’s source for the metric, “blockchain activity” is defined as “the number of operations on the blockchain in the last 24 hours.” Operations are broadly defined as any type of action that could be recorded on chain. But operations are not standardized across blockchains which makes comparing across chains difficult.”

Besides, drawing parallel comparisons across blockchains with radically different use cases and operations is difficult.

Although Kik’s original research showed a high number of account creations, Coin Metrics data revealed that many of these accounts were empty.

Additionally, Kin’s “create account” operation has a fee of .001 Kin. The report highlighted that a metric such as “operations count” for the purpose of blockchain activity cannot be used as a measurement tool since Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains do not track account creations on-chain.

In terms of Transfer of Value, the report elaborated,

“Theoretically, high daily transfer value should signify high activity. But transfer value is often quite noisy, especially on low fee blockchains where there are minimal costs to sending transactions. Some transfers might simply be users moving money around between addresses they own”

Instead, Coin Metrics contrived “adjusted transfer value” metric to eliminate what it called, “noise and certain artifacts like self-sends, or deliberate spammy behavior.” Coin Metric noted that this gives a clearer picture of the on-chain activity, resulting in a decreased transfer value when compared to other blockchains, even if it had a high number of daily blockchain operations.

Additionally, Kin’s average transaction value was also low, when compared to other blockchains. For the first claim, Coin Metrics concluded that the Kin platform had more micro-transactions than Bitcoin and other dominant blockchains, while highlighting the fact that the latter blockchains are not primarily used for such transactions.

Regarding Kik’s second claim that said that over 300,000 users were earning and spending Kin as a currency, Coin Metrics assessed its blockchain usage. The number of addresses is not necessarily equal to the number of users since a single user could have multiple addresses. Hence, Coin Metrics took the number of active users into account, which the report defined as “the number of unique addresses that were active in the network [either as a recipient or originator of a ledger change] during that day.” The report noted,

“Kin 2 has significantly more originating active addresses than Kin 3. Although Kin is in the process of migrating to Kin 3, it appears that Kik is using data from the Kin 2 chain to support their claims about usage.”

Further, Kin 2 and Kin 3 had more active addresses that received payments than originated payments, which meant that there were more “earners” on Kin than “spenders,” also noting that only 35,000 addresses held over 10,000 kin [nearly $0.23]. The report added that the figures are lower than other blockchains which have a minimum of 1,000,000 addresses with at least $1.

After examining multiple critical aspects, Coin Metrics concluded that Kin fell below dominant blockchains in terms of daily active addresses, despite maintaining steady growth. It said,

“A majority of Kin’s active addresses have small account balances. While this makes sense for a network built around micropayments, when viewed across multiple metrics, our data show that Kin is not more widely used than dominant chains such as Bitcoin or Ethereum.”





Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter


Continue Reading