On April 16, 2026, in Singapore, which is considered relatively advanced in cryptocurrency asset regulation, the police's anti-fraud center and the cyber investigation department quietly launched a six-week joint operation aimed at addressing the recent surge in cryptocurrency investment scams. Various local and international exchanges, including Coinbase, Coinhako, Gemini, Independent Reserve, OKX, StraitsX, and Upbit, were involved in the same operational command chain, cooperating with the police to intervene in suspicious funding flows and account activities during transaction phases. During the operation, the police and exchanges jointly utilized blockchain analysis tools such as Chainalysis and TRM Labs to identify and label suspicious paths on public ledgers, attempting to intercept funds before they fell entirely under the control of scam groups. By the end of the six weeks, official statistics provided an impressive result: a total of 145 potential cryptocurrency investment scam victims were identified, and over $4.2 million in potential financial losses were successfully prevented, according to a single public source. The on-chain data previously used by scammers for covert transfers is now being reconfigured as a protective tool for investors, thanks to the collaboration of law enforcement and compliance platforms.

Six-Week Joint Operations: 145 People Prevented from Losing $4.2 Million

This operation was not a series of isolated case investigations, but a "joint operation" with a clear start and end timeline and collaborative framework. From April 16 to May 31, 2026, the Singapore police's anti-fraud center and the cyber investigation department established a blockade, one side including local and international trading platforms such as Coinbase, Coinhako, Gemini, Independent Reserve, OKX, StraitsX, and Upbit, and the other side using their Chainalysis, TRM Labs, and other on-chain analysis tools. While continuously monitoring suspicious funding paths on public ledgers, the police and platforms agreed that when they identified addresses and transfer instructions suspected of being related to cryptocurrency investment scams, the platform would promptly alert, delay, or refuse execution at the trading phase, providing a "cooling window" for potential victims.

At the end of the six weeks, this mechanism was quantified for the first time into concrete individuals and finances: 145 identified potential victims, under the dual intervention of exchanges and police, had over $4.2 million in funds that did not flow into scam addresses. It is important to emphasize that the intervention occurred on links clearly related to investment scams, not a blanket check on all cryptocurrency transactions, ensuring that compliant users could continue normal investment activities while making "precise interception" a core feature of this on-chain anti-fraud model.

On-Chain Profiling Turns the Tide: Police Track Scams with Data

In this six-week operation, a key turning point was that the police no longer relied solely on post-reporting and traditional clue checks but actively treated the blockchain as an intelligence source. The anti-fraud center and the cyber investigation department teamed up with several exchanges to access evidentiary and analytical services from Chainalysis and TRM Labs, systematically sorting through transaction records on public ledgers. According to available information, these tools are often used by global law enforcement agencies to track illegal transactions and identify networks of suspicious addresses, and now they are explicitly utilized by Singapore police to lock in on on-chain activities related to cryptocurrency investment scams, screening abnormal paths to provide a basis for early intervention in potential victims' asset transfers.

This reflects a "chain governs chain" mindset: scammers exploit retail investors' misunderstanding of on-chain anonymity, while the police leverage the underlying feature of public ledgers, where all transactions can be tracked. At a principle level, it can be understood as using data profiling to turn the tide — making funding paths and address relationships visible and understandable, and then allowing exchanges to accurately intercept at the entry stage. It is important to highlight that the currently available public material does not disclose the specific operational processes, model parameters, or risk control details between the police and tool providers; external observers can only infer their working models based on known uses and results. Therefore, this section concentrates on principles and patterns rather than attempting to recreate a technical script not present in public information.

Exchanges No Longer Stand By: Compliance Platforms Join the Front Lines of Anti-Fraud

When the police identified a high-risk funding path on the public ledger through Chainalysis and TRM Labs, the real "brake pedal" often lay in the hands of the exchanges. In this operation, platforms such as Coinbase, Coinhako, Gemini, Independent Reserve, OKX, StraitsX, and Upbit, based on the clues provided by the police, connected to their risk control systems to identify associated addresses and transaction patterns at critical stages such as fund inflow and outflow, token withdrawal, and account operations. Once they discovered instructions highly overlapping with potential victim fund transfers, they cooperated by executing delays, restrictions, or manual reviews to assist the police in "cooperatively preventing fund transfers for victims." The specific triggering thresholds and review processes were not disclosed, but it can be confirmed that interception actions were not completed by a single party, but established through a closed-loop collaboration between law enforcement's on-chain judgments and platform business-side execution.

This public-private cooperation model quietly rewrote the conventional role of exchanges within the entire ecosystem. They were no longer just intermediaries for buying and selling or providing accounts, but actively assumed responsibility for user safety and risk control within a regulatory framework — ensuring the smoothness of on-chain transfers while also being willing to press the pause button when suspicious scam paths were detected. Notably, multiple platforms that have compliance qualifications or service layouts in Singapore chose to participate in the six-week joint operation, which itself is a statement: sending a signal of cooperation to regulators, reinforcing their identity as "safety partners" to users, and indicating to the global industry that compliant exchanges willing to stand on the front lines against fraud are becoming an important component of Singapore's cryptocurrency asset regulatory landscape.

Crypto Friendliness and High-Pressure Crackdown: Singapore's Regulatory Balancing Act

In the global cryptocurrency landscape, Singapore has deliberately shaped a "dual identity": on one hand, it is viewed as a jurisdiction with relatively advanced cryptocurrency asset regulation and friendly compliance practices, willing to allow qualified institutions to land locally; on the other hand, it explicitly lists fraud and illegal activities as high-pressure governance targets, continuously tightening the gray area through law enforcement and technological means. The six-week joint operation led by the anti-fraud center and cyber investigation department is a continuation of this policy path — not denying the investment itself, but focusing on specific scenarios where the "investment narrative" is abused by scammers, using on-chain evidentiary tools and intervening in transaction phases to delineate risk boundaries.

The list of exchanges participating in the operation included international platforms such as Coinbase, OKX, and Upbit, as well as local or regional platforms serving Singapore users such as Coinhako, Independent Reserve, and StraitsX, compounded by the use of evidentiary tools like Chainalysis and TRM Labs, presenting not just a regulatory action of a single country but a model of cross-border cooperation: regulatory departments set anti-fraud targets and technical frameworks, while platforms cooperate at the user and transaction levels to identify suspicious paths and assist in blocking potential losses when necessary. Reflecting back on the result where 145 potential victims were identified in advance and over $4.2 million in losses were successfully prevented, this balancing act of "crypto friendliness" and "high-pressure crackdowns" is forming a closed loop. Singapore is attempting to demonstrate that regulation can maintain sustained and concrete pressure on on-chain scams without stifling compliant innovation.

The Attack and Defense Battle Has Just Begun: How Far Can On-Chain Anti-Fraud Go?

This six-week joint operation resembled a large-scale stress test: Singapore has proved that the combination of "police + exchanges + on-chain evidence gathering" can indeed identify and intervene in some potential victims before and after transactions, viewed as a successful model, but there is still a noticeable gap from becoming the default norm in the global industry. Currently, within the scope of public knowledge, no more countries can be seen replicating cases of the same level in terms of scale and depth of cooperation. The next several observation points will determine how far on-chain anti-fraud can go: whether more jurisdictions will be willing to adapt their local police and platform cooperation mechanisms to Singapore's template; whether more local and international exchanges will be willing to upgrade "temporary cooperation actions" to regular risk control processes; and whether on-chain analysis tools like Chainalysis and TRM Labs can continuously expand in asset coverage and complex path identification while embedding themselves into cross-border cooperation frameworks. For ordinary investors, the insights from this model are more direct: on one hand, treat cryptocurrency investment scams as basic environmental risks, remain vigilant against any "guaranteed high returns" or "expert-led" narratives, and steer clear of platforms and communities with unclear origins and lack of transparency; on the other hand, when selecting and using platforms, don't just look at functions and fees, but also pay attention to their investments in risk control and compliance, and their willingness to engage in substantive cooperation with law enforcement. A platform's willingness to act before you become a statistic is itself a safety signal worth tracking over the long term.

Join our community, let’s discuss and grow stronger together!
Exclusive Hyperliquid benefits for AiCoin: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
Exclusive Aster benefits for AiCoin: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2
On-chain Telegram community: https://t.me/AiCoinWhaleData
On-chain community: https://www.aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=N6OVMor5g
AiCoin on-chain Twitter: https://x.com/aicoinwhaledata

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。