Topic: IS ATOMIC WALLET HACK OR SCAM? 🔴 Immediately Withdraw your Funds (Read 488 times)

I do not think that he will do that, it is clear that this topic created only for merits, as the user is looking for such news in order to rank-up quickly.
This account (nlovric) is hacked/sold, so you should treat his posts as trolls rather than useful discussion.

It is easy to track such hacks, whether it is from an individual or an organization, but I think that the hackers will not move coins quickly due to the ease of their detection. If the wallet owners do not despair, they may be able to recover their money.

The 35 million dollars received as a result of the Atomic Wallet hack were withdrawn to the Garantex exchange known for its connections with criminals. Perhaps this will be the last point of tracking these funds.

It was decided to call the representatives of the wallet to clarify the circumstances of the hack by the law enforcement agencies of Kazakhstan.

At the same time, the cybersecurity company Match System made a sensational statement that Atomic Wallet stored all the private keys of users on its servers.

So much unexpected news related to this hack! More and more it seems that this is a scam disguised as a hack.

That statement is BS. It's like someone saying "I made a great design, so I want to keep it a trade secret." Which would have been fine if it was actually a trade secret, but the failure for their "unique product" that "stands out in the market" to pass any security audits it was given raised loud alarm bells and sirens about the safety of this wallet.

Sorry, you can make a beautiful sculpture of a pig, but at the end of the day, it will still be a pig.

Lollllllll!
Anyhow, no everything that is written in a ToS means it's also legal and a judge can't send this to a trashcan, they could write in the ToS that after 10 transactions you must sell them a kidney for 1 Shiba Inu, how would that work?
But pretty interesting, one week has passed, and no update don what caused this quite strange hack,
-why were only 1% of the wallets affected
-why are they only referring to the percentage of wallets and not to the percentage of the sum lost I doubt users had 3.5 billion in total
-legally speaking if they deny any responsibility over the lost funds and custody how can they claim in your name the freezing of such funds from exchanges
-if they didn't find the exploit as they haven't named it why are they not asking the users to secure the funds as obviously, the wallet is vulnerable

Furthermore,
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1sSFm8VHKm-ifnjCGj-JA2godUWEOtV9tHVeI-DAaqVw/viewform?edit_requested=true
they are asking users for:
Seriously, even a chatGPT would write you in 10 seconds a script to follow the funds if you ahve the hash, why make it so hard for your customers to fill the report?

Imagine losing a few hundred thousand $, having to fill that field, and refraining from using the word "mom".

First off, it's just not right to toss some closed-source software into the same category with trustworthy open-source wallets that have a solid track record without major issues. We can't really know what kind of vulnerabilities might have been lurking in the Atomic wallet, and who knows if they'll ever come clean about it publicly? Open-source software, on the other hand, gives transparency by allowing users and the community to thoroughly examine and identify potential weaknesses. If you think about it, a closed-source non-custodial wallet isn't all that different from a custodial wallet or an exchange. You're basically putting your trust in the company and developers to keep your coins safe, without being able to double-check it independently.

No system is immune to hacking. Hacks, by definition, involve exploiting vulnerabilities or weaknesses in security measures to bypass or break into digital systems. However, it doesn't mean that all wallets are inherently unsafe. There are still many reputable non-custodial wallet providers who prioritize security and take measures to protect user funds.


That is simply not true. In fact, cold wallets, such as hardware wallets or paper wallets, offer a high level of security by keeping private keys offline and out of reach from potential hackers.

Personally, I am still very confused as to how money went missing from a non custodian wallet, and not just on one or two wallets, but on several hundred of wallet, and not like the users of this wallet posted their wallet private keys or seed phrase any where for phishing,  being a non custodial wallet user myself, this is very scary, we are advised never leave our funds on a centralized exchange, or store our funds on a custodial wallet due to how they are prone to hacks and possibly rug pulls, now, if a non custodial wallet can be hacked without the user exposing his or her keys any where online or to someone, it simply means there are no safe wallet to use anywhere..

By the way, I still think Atomic wallet has a hand in some way In this hack, they are yet to tell the truth of what truly happened.

Hello if i am interested to invest in bitcoin, what would be a safe wallet to store my bitcoin? I see this topic and people lost their investment?
bitcoin is not safe?

I had a look at the Atomic Wallet profile on Twitter and they have not updated victims or those seeking information. The last they mentioned anything about the hack was two days ago.

Even if their claim about just 1% of their customers being affected by the hack it totalled a massive $35 million and they are still looking to find what happened therefore the potential to increase the number of victims (and thus increase the actual amount stolen) is still a possibility.

Why? You know, Atomic Wallet is actually closed-source software, which can make a big difference. And as far as I know, I have never really heard anyone in the Bitcoin community ever recommended Atomic Wallet (or similar closed-source crap) as a reliable choice for a wallet. I mean, if one of those crappy wallets gets hacked, why should it matter to the community at large? It is a problem for those who are affected and for the company behind the wallet, but it is their problem. I understand that it may sound insensitive, but it can be difficult to empathize with someone who reportedly had tens of millions of dollars worth of crypto and did not prioritize the security of their funds

The usual culprit according to a report: Lazarus hackers linked to the $35 million Atomic Wallet heist.


So it's a state sponsored hacked, and we have heard numerous times before that the Lazarus group is really into this crypto hacking, like a reported South Korean exchanges that they did many years ago. So I'm not surprised by it, this is one way why the government of North Korea still up to this day was able to survived despite the West's sanctions against this oppressive regime.

This is not alarming to me because I dont use wallets like Atomic, Trust and stuff that have closed code.

You dont have to trust some unknown wallet manufacturer and centralized exchanges, just use proved wallets with verified code that exist for years in Bitcoin space, it is not that hard.

Since incident like this already happen I will never trust them again since there's no second chance should be given to a platform since they need to be good in their security and doesn't let any issues to happen. Its so dumb for people to trust them again since this could happen for second time around as it has possibilities that they do a inside job on this incident. Better leave them up since there's nothing good it can offer to us. And this is already a messed platform.

Isn't it a very alarming situation for the crypto holders? Now how can you trust any wallet?

If today Atomic Wallet wants to do an exit scam, they change the code, got access to wallets, and took the money. The same can be done by the developers and team at trust wallet or unstoppable wallets. We know it is not safe to keep money in centralized wallets or exchanges but if the personal wallets (closed source / open source), will do these kinds of mess, then where will the crypto holders store their money? This is not a good situation for the crypto community.

I dont know if Atomic wallet was hack or exit scam from some of their developers.
It is enough to have one bad guy working there to upload bad code, and nobody from outside is checking small unknown wallets for safety and security.
Atomic team behavior is very strange and their website doesnt have a single warning announcement about this problem, that is not normal.   

I guess I should have been somewhat surprised upon learning of the Atomic Wallet hack but really it was not that much of a surprise to learn that allegedly $35 million was stolen from various wallets being allegedly compromised.

If any source code is freely available it will allow any and all eyes to go over the code and would result in reports of what needed to be fixed or patched however in this example of code being partially closed-source we can see the ramifications of essentially playing with million of USD$ of other peoples money while proclaiming to be providing a safe and secure service/product.

This is directly from the Atomic Wallet website: https://support.atomicwallet.io/article/184-why-is-atomic-wallet-not-open-source


---------------------------

Why is Atomic Wallet not open source?

For the most part, Atomic Wallet's using open source libraries. However, some parts of the code aren't publicly available.

But why?

When it comes to money, it's only natural to trust no one but yourself, even more so if we're talking crypto. "Open source" doesn't necessarily translate to "secure," though. Here's our reasoning behind keeping our wallet a partly closed source app:

 

• Atomic Wallet is a unique product created by a hard-working team. We created a service we are proud of, so we stand for the uniqueness of its design and technologies. We want to continue developing our product and stand out in the market.
• We don't want to make scammers' jobs easier. There's a saying that goes: "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow." This could mean that an open source app wouldn't be able to get away with questionable or outright malicious code practices. However, please bear in mind that this approach is a double-edged sword. Sure, it allows crypto enthusiasts and software engineers to audit the code to make sure it's secure. At the same time, it also greatly aids scammers & hackers in learning everything about the app's inner workings. Speaking of which...
• We don't want fake apps to boom in numbers. By making just a few minor tweaks, scammers would be able to build a fake wallet app based on our source code. Many wallets have already been targeted by scammers creating fake GitHub repositories filled with malware. Should we make our code freely available, building a genuine-looking scam app would be a matter of a few hours.

We perfectly understand some crypto holders' preference for open source wallets. Still, we believe the points outlined above to be good enough reasons for keeping our app closed source for now.

---------------------------


I cannot be the only one seeing the irony in this because they have justified their case for remaining partially closed-source because their system was built by a hard working team and would like the uniqueness of their design and technology to to stand out in the market.

Furthermore, they remained partially closed-source because they did not want to make a scammers job easier and cited "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow."

Also, the fake apps comment is somewhat strange as far as timing is concerned because " Many wallets have already been targeted by scammers creating fake GitHub repositories filled with malware. Should we make our code freely available, building a genuine-looking scam app would be a matter of a few hours."

Their website https://atomicwallet.io remains completely quiet about the hack, it mentions nothing about the biggest news to hit Atomic Wallet since it was created and I not surprised because it shows another reason why they cannot be trusted and should never have been trusted in the first place.

They have put out a statement on Twitter stating some of the funds have been effectively seized as they were sent to various exchanges but have not elaborated on how much. Putting all this aside, this is a perfect example of why any closed-source (or partially closed-source) product cannot be trusted to keep your crypto funds safe.

And that is why we recommended to newbie or even to experience holders not to used closed source wallet because we don't know what's inside the code. Worst thing is that there could be some backdoor and that it will be  triggered by someone who knows it and steal the crypto of the owner's wallet.

I haven't touch or used Atomic wallet, although it has it's fair share of good reviews (but the again, maybe those who gave it a positive review might be changing their tune now).

Yes, the news of the Atomic Wallet hack has gone widespread, particularly now that the hacker has moved the cryptocurrency to a specific Bitcoin mixing company, but the damage done will be difficult to forget for those who have been affected by the issue.

Yes, they will not acknowledge being the cause of the hack, but with the way things are going, the Feds may intervene in the accident.

You know situation with Atomic wallet is bad when you see Bleepingcomputer starts to write articles about it, with people losing over $35 million in crypto.
Someone said that there was a malware in one of recent download files so you should NOT open your Atomic wallet if you still have connected to internet, once you connect they have your seedphrase.
Solution is to use seed words from Atomic, import them to another wallet and move coins asap to different device, best hardware wallet.
Good alternative for Atomic wallet is open source wallet called Unstoppable, if you want to mess around with other coins, not just BTC.
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/atomic-wallet-hacks-lead-to-over-35-million-in-crypto-stolen/

Yeah, Atomic Wallet is a closed source and now that this issue has gone viral and they've got millions of users. It's good to see that many is becoming aware of their issue and will for sure going to leave them. Whatever will be the result of the investigation it will only lead on one thing and that's their reputation has gone now.

No theft will admit that they robbed and that's why even with reputation or none, if they're into this, there will be no admission unless big time investigation has proved them then that's the time that they'll have no escape of admitting it.

Possible but I'll wait for those on going investigations if they'll end up with this conclusion or with an inside job.

From what I've learned, users were hacked through social engineering and when they reached a specific number of victims they decided to pull the plug. Basically, these hackers had private keys of random accounts for months before deciding to steal everything.