Blockchain领域线下威胁：从虚拟走向现实的安全挑战

In the blockchain industry, we often focus on technical threats such as on-chain attacks and smart contract vulnerabilities. However, recent frequent cases remind us that security risks have extended from the virtual world into real life.

Last year, a cryptocurrency billionaire recounted his near-kidnapping case during a court hearing. The criminals tracked his movements using GPS tracking, forged documents, and other means, and launched an attack from behind as he was going upstairs. Fortunately, the entrepreneur managed to escape by biting off one of the assailant's fingers.

As the value of crypto assets continues to rise, real-world attacks targeting industry professionals are becoming increasingly rampant. This article will delve into the methods of these attacks, review typical cases, explore the underlying criminal chains, and provide practical prevention suggestions.

Definition and Characteristics of Real-World Attacks

The so-called "real world attack" refers to criminals who do not use technical intrusion methods but instead force victims to hand over passwords or assets through threats, extortion, or even kidnapping. This type of attack is direct, efficient, and has a lower implementation threshold.

Typical Case Review

Since the beginning of this year, there have been frequent kidnapping cases targeting cryptocurrency users, with victims including core project members, industry opinion leaders, and even ordinary investors.

In early May, French police successfully rescued the father of a kidnapped cryptocurrency tycoon. The kidnappers demanded a huge ransom and brutally severed the victim's fingers to pressure the family.

In January of this year, the co-founder of a hardware wallet company and his wife were attacked at home by armed assailants. The kidnappers also resorted to extreme measures such as cutting off fingers, demanding a ransom of 100 bitcoins.

In early June, a suspect involved in planning multiple kidnappings of French cryptocurrency entrepreneurs was arrested in Tangier. The French Minister of Justice confirmed that the suspect was wanted by Interpol for charges such as "kidnapping, illegal detention of hostages."

In New York, an Italian cryptocurrency investor was lured to a villa and subjected to three weeks of captivity and torture. The criminal gang used various brutal methods to threaten the victim, forcing him to surrender his wallet private keys. Notably, the assailants were "insiders" who precisely targeted their victim through on-chain analysis and social media tracking.

In mid-May, the daughter of a co-founder of a trading platform and her young grandson were nearly forcibly dragged into a white van on the streets of Paris. Fortunately, the timely intervention of passersby caused the kidnapper to flee.

These cases indicate that, compared to on-chain attacks, offline violent threats are more direct, efficient, and have a lower threshold for implementation. Attackers are mostly young individuals, aged between 16 and 23, with basic knowledge of cryptocurrency. Data released by the French prosecution shows that several minors have already been formally charged for their involvement in such cases.

In addition to publicly reported cases, the security team also noticed that some users encountered control or coercion from the other party during offline transactions while整理ing the information submitted by victims, resulting in asset damage.

In addition, there are some "non-violent coercion" incidents that have not escalated into physical violence. For example, attackers threaten victims by掌握 their privacy, whereabouts, or other leverage to force them to transfer funds. Although this type of situation does not cause direct harm, it has touched upon the boundary of personal threats, and whether it falls within the category of "real-world attacks" is still worth further discussion.

It is important to emphasize that the disclosed cases may only be the tip of the iceberg. Many victims choose to remain silent due to concerns about retaliation, law enforcement not taking action, or exposure of their identity, which makes it difficult to accurately assess the true scale of offline attacks.

Crime Chain Analysis

A research team from a certain university published a paper in 2024 that systematically analyzed cases of global cryptocurrency users encountering violent coercion, revealing the attack patterns and defense difficulties in depth.

Based on multiple typical cases, we summarize that the criminal chain of real-world attacks roughly includes the following key links:

1. Information Locking

Attackers usually start from on-chain information, combining transaction behavior, label data, NFT holdings, etc., to initially assess the scale of the target assets. At the same time, social media group chats, public statements, industry interviews, and even some leaked data also become important sources of auxiliary intelligence.

2. Realistic Positioning and Contact

After determining the target identity, the attacker will attempt to obtain their real identity information, including residence, frequently visited locations, and family structure. Common methods include:

• Inducing targets to leak information on social media platforms
• Use public registration information (such as domain registration information) for reverse lookup
• Use leaked data for reverse search
• Introduce the target into a controlled environment through tracking or false invitations.

3. Violent Threats and Extortion

Once the target is controlled, attackers often use violent means to force them to hand over their wallet private keys, mnemonic phrases, and two-factor authentication permissions. Common methods include:

• Beating, electric shock, amputation and other bodily harm
• Coerce the victim to operate the transfer
• Intimidate relatives and request them to transfer funds on behalf of the family.

4. Money Laundering and Fund Transfer

After obtaining the private key or mnemonic phrase, attackers usually quickly transfer assets using methods such as:

• Use a mixer to conceal the source of funds
• Transfer to a controlled address or non-compliant centralized exchange account
• Liquidate assets through OTC channels or the black market

Some attackers have a background in Blockchain technology and are familiar with on-chain tracking mechanisms. They intentionally create multi-hop paths or cross-chain obfuscation to evade tracking.

Countermeasures

Using multi-signature wallets or decentralized mnemonic phrases is not practical in extreme scenarios of personal threats, often perceived by attackers as a refusal to cooperate, which in turn exacerbates violent behavior. In the face of real-world attacks, a more prudent strategy should be "give something, and ensure losses are controllable":

• Set up an inducement wallet: Prepare an account that appears to be the main wallet but only holds a small amount of assets, to be used for "stop-loss feeding" in case of danger.
• Family Safety Management: Family members need to understand the basic knowledge of where assets are located and how to respond cooperatively; set a safety word to convey danger signals in case of abnormal situations; strengthen the security settings of household devices and the physical security of the residence.
• Avoid identity exposure: Avoid flaunting wealth or sharing trading records on social platforms; avoid revealing crypto asset holdings in real life; manage your social circle's information to prevent leaks from acquaintances. The most effective protection is always to make people "not know you are a target worth monitoring."

Conclusion

With the rapid development of the crypto industry, understanding your customer ( KYC ) and anti-money laundering ( AML ) regulations play a key role in enhancing financial transparency and preventing illegal capital flow. However, there are still many challenges in the implementation process, especially regarding data security and user privacy. For instance, the vast amount of sensitive information (such as identity, biometric data, etc.) collected by platforms to meet regulatory requirements could become a target for attacks if not properly protected.

Therefore, we recommend introducing a dynamic risk identification system based on traditional KYC processes to reduce unnecessary information collection and lower the risk of data breaches. At the same time, the platform can integrate with professional anti-money laundering and tracking platforms to assist in identifying potential suspicious transactions, thereby enhancing risk control capabilities from the source. On the other hand, building data security capabilities is equally essential; by utilizing professional red team testing services, the platform can gain support for attack simulations in real environments, comprehensively assessing the exposure paths and risk points of sensitive data.