Event Overview

Recently, the decentralized wallet tool Trust Wallet was reported to have its browser extension compromised by a source-level injection attack. The nature of the incident has been defined by several security teams as a precise poisoning of the extension, rather than a simple phishing link or fake plugin installation. According to monitoring data released by SlowMist and Pionex, the attackers embedded malicious PostHog JS in the official extension code to continuously collect user actions and sensitive information, leading to asset theft. Preliminary statistics show that the affected users have incurred losses of approximately $6 million, with some assets being transferred multiple times in a short period. Concurrently with the security incident, Bitcoin's price has remained volatile in the high range of about $88,000–$89,000, recording a slight increase of about 0.8%–1.7% over 24 hours, with no panic selling observed in the spot and derivatives markets, reflecting more of a high-level turnover and slight emotional disturbance.

Attack Details

From the current publicly available information, the key to this incident lies in the attackers successfully injecting PostHog-related scripts into the source code of the Trust Wallet browser extension. By collecting user interactions and potential sensitive data through front-end tracking, they were able to conduct targeted theft in conjunction with on-chain monitoring. Such scripts are commonly used for analyzing product usage, making them less likely to raise immediate alarms in the code repository. More concerning is that, according to security teams, the repair version released by Trust Wallet did not completely remove the related malicious scripts in the early stages, leaving some users exposed to monitoring and theft even after updating the extension, causing losses to continue to expand over several days. SlowMist founder Yu Jin publicly stated that the attackers were "very familiar with the Trust Wallet extension source code," and the CISO of SlowMist emphasized the need to quickly investigate the integrity of the developer terminal environment and code repository, highlighting that this is not a simple configuration oversight but rather a targeted infiltration of the development and release chain.

Supply Chain Risks

From the perspective of supply chain attacks, the industry is generally concerned about the scenario where developer devices or core code repositories may have been compromised early on: once attackers gain access to the development environment, they have the opportunity to insert seemingly "normal" analytical code into the source code, dependency libraries, or build scripts, waiting for subsequent compilation, packaging, and listing processes to automatically propagate. For browser extensions, distribution heavily relies on official app stores and CI/CD automated build pipelines. Once the build products are tampered with at the source, the attack surface can quickly spread to existing users through version updates. Current information indicates that Trust Wallet needs to further clarify the security mechanism gaps in the build, signing, and release processes. This incident has also directly impacted the security model of wallet-type plugins: traditional audit methods focusing on private key storage and on-chain interactions clearly struggle to cover supply chain-level tracking scripts and telemetry components, forcing teams to prioritize dependency management, build reproducibility, and third-party code audits.

Flow of Financial Losses

According to Pionex statistics, the scale of stolen assets involved in this attack is approximately $6 million, covering tokens and stablecoin assets across multiple public chains. Although the specific composition of the currencies has not been fully disclosed, it can be confirmed that these funds were quickly dispersed and migrated across chains through multiple transfers in a short period to increase tracking difficulty. On-chain analysis further shows that approximately $4 million of related assets have flowed into several centralized exchanges, with attackers suspected of attempting to cash out or further disperse using CEX liquidity. In theory, exchanges can freeze and investigate suspicious addresses based on information provided by security teams, but given that the assets have been split and mixed multiple times, the actual recovery rate remains uncertain. For directly affected users, the short-term challenges include difficulty in recovering funds, unclear compensation pathways, and diminished trust in usage; for the Trust Wallet brand, this incident not only undermines its "secure wallet" positioning but will also impact new user conversion and existing user retention for a considerable time, forcing the project team to provide more persuasive responses regarding communication transparency, compensation plans, and subsequent security improvements.

Bitcoin Price Correlation

During the same period that the Trust Wallet security incident was exposed, Bitcoin's price fluctuated repeatedly in the range of about $88,000–$89,000, with a 24-hour increase maintained at about 0.8%–1.7%, indicating that funds did not significantly withdraw due to a single wallet security incident. From the transaction structure, the volatility in the spot and futures markets is more akin to "high-level consolidation" rather than a risk-averse retreat, suggesting that mainstream funds view this attack as a risk at the individual project level rather than a systemic security crisis. Historical experience shows that multiple wallet or trading platform security incidents can indeed trigger emotional selling pressure on BTC in the short term, but this often concentrates on scenarios involving massive black swan events or regulatory impacts; in other medium-scale incidents, BTC prices tend to show a brief pullback before quickly returning to the original trend. In this incident, Bitcoin maintained narrow fluctuations, validating this pattern: the market distinguishes individual security risks from macro market logic, focusing more on economic data, liquidity conditions, and institutional entry rhythms rather than the impact of single-point attacks on overall valuation logic.

On-Chain and Macro Resonance

In addition to the Trust Wallet incident, multiple on-chain and macro signals also intertwined during the same period, amplifying changes in market structure. A whale address "pension-usdt.eth" chose to close a position of 30,000 ETH at a high, worth approximately $87.5 million at the time, which is seen as a typical signal of marginal risk appetite retreat, indicating that some medium to long-term funds prefer to secure profits at the current valuation level rather than continue to significantly increase positions. Meanwhile, the Uniswap community passed a governance proposal involving fee switches, receiving support from approximately 125 million UNI votes, indicating that mainstream DeFi protocols are transitioning to a more "cash flow-oriented" model, which will have a lasting impact on liquidity provider behavior and the overall DeFi yield curve. Observing these factors alongside Bitcoin's high-level fluctuations reveals a more pronounced structural differentiation of funds between blue-chip assets, DeFi protocols, and long-tail assets: on one hand, leading assets maintain relatively robust chip games; on the other hand, high-risk sectors face more frequent position rebalancing and valuation repricing under multiple disturbances from governance, fees, and security incidents.

Risks and Outlook

The attack on the Trust Wallet browser extension has highlighted the systemic shortcomings in supply chain security for wallet-type products: once the development environment, dependency libraries, and build processes lack continuous monitoring and independent auditing, even if the front-end interface and on-chain interaction logic appear normal, users may still unknowingly be on the edge of being monitored and stolen. The implication for ordinary users is to reduce the long-term holding of large assets in browser extensions, regularly change mnemonic phrases and private key usage environments, and increase sensitivity to abnormal version updates and permission requests. From a market perspective, Bitcoin is currently still fluctuating at high levels in the $88,000–$89,000 range. Based on the 24-hour increase of about 0.8%–1.7%, the risk-reward ratio is clearly different from the earlier upward phase, with high-leverage chasing facing greater short-term volatility and pullback pressure. In the context of some key information still pending verification, whether for BTC position management or the use of various wallets and DeFi tools, it is increasingly necessary to control overall leverage levels, diversify custody risks, and prioritize adopting hardware wallets and multi-signature practices for more robust self-custody to retain sufficient maneuvering space in the event of potential sudden market movements and security incidents.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh

OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。