> In just 40 minutes, the attacker shuffled my staked ETH and other tokens through multiple transactions, then drained the account.
One of the many, many benefits of irreversible transactions.
> I made mistakes, yes
His first mistake was keeping six figures worth of 'cash' in a wallet that anyone with less than 40 minutes of access to can swipe.
My brother (a tech professional in California) does not have any crypto or social media, and attackers still stole his phone number, which they used to steal his email account, which they then tried to get into a non-existent Coinbase account. He was only out of the time it took to get his phone number back (a couple of hours later).
Can somebody explain what exactly this means, and how it works?
We trolled each other in class with it a bit. But at one point some student not in our class sent out a mass email, which was against the rules. I replied with a From line as "Administrator" and a bunch of whitespace, telling the girl that she broke the rule and would be suspended for it. Our teacher made me apologize, and I was lucky that I didn't get into more trouble beyond that.
Basically, the from field on an email can be anything you want. It's like sending physical mail and using a fake letterhead with someone else's info, just type what you want. No verification.
That's sometimes a good feature. Like, a third party provider can send newsletters on behalf of company A. But can also be bad, when used for phishing.
However, the email doesn't just appear in your mailbox. It comes to your email provider by another server connecting to it and sending the email. Spf allows the owner of A.com to specify which IPs/servers are actually acting on their behalf. So if I get an email from something@A.com, I can lookup and verify that the sending server is one to trust. If not, the email client should reject or warn the user somehow.
I'm pretty surprised gmail didn't flag this at least. When I did it for a class in Uni, it always let me know that the FROM header didn't match the sender since that's a clear attack vector
I would also assume something as prominent as the Gmail website/app for iOS, and the google.com domain, would have all possible email security features correctly configured.
So.. is this not the case? Or is it, but due to bad UI, despite all this security, any schmoe can send email appearing to come from google.com, and I have to pore over unspecified details in the "full header" to spot a fake?
What clued me in was that he said he couldnt share the estate documents with me until I gave him my popup 2FA code.
OP said the coin base account was drained within “minutes”. Server thief bait can take up to 24h to notify you when someone takes the bait.
> We'll put a tiny amount of cryptocurrency in a wallet, but probably still enough to attract the attention of automated scripts. We notify you when it's taken within 24 hours.
One of the best features of Apple iOS 26 is the new call-screening feature[1].
[1] https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/iphone/iphe4b3f7823/io...
Yeah, I would be curious to see the actual email headers of what was received.
As an aside, fun fact, this would not be possible with @apple.com because Apple employees have old-school S/MIME signatures as an additional security layer.
https://undercodetesting.com/how-email-spoofing-exploits-spf...
~ dig _dmarc.google.com txt +short
"v=DMARC1; p=reject; rua=mailto:mailauth-reports@google.com"There isn't any federal regulation at all covering your Bitcoin.
Unrelated, but for added spice, here's a thread from ten months where everyone agrees you're a fool unless you secure your coinbase account with google authenticator
https://www.reddit.com/r/CoinBase/comments/1h65zuh/account_h...
With my bank, I've been able to recover several thousand after a thief was able to bypass the 2FA app used to verify large transfers. (I still don't know how they were able to bypass the verification, and after investigating our bank never told us. Not sure that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy, but at least I was made whole with minimal fuss.)
I wonder sometimes how many scams I've avoided simply by pretty much never answering my phone when someone calls unless I'm expecting a call or it's someone I know.
> The attacker already had access to my Gmail, Drive, Photos — and my Google Authenticator codes, because Google had cloud-synced my codes.
Ugh, google
I was pretty suspicious but thought I would get them to authenticate their identity as someone really from Amazon by telling me the last thing I had really ordered was...
I must have stayed on the call for 20 minutes, eventually they ended up swearing at me - all the time I could hear other people in the same room trying the same lines on different people. I have no idea why I stayed on for so long....
They have the scammers working off phone queues, it takes a little bit of time to get the call to the scammer, who has to start off with a script, so there's a delay.
Remember, the scammer, also likely not a native english speaker, also probably bored out of their mind, has to spin up, they have to read the name, understand how to say it and then say it out loud. Their is a mental startup time that a normal conversation doesn't have.
If someone calls you and isn't ready to immediately respond to "hello" it's a scammer.
The attacker had access to the Google account which includes passwords from Chrome and also the 2fa codes stored in Google Authenticator, because those were synced to Google without the author noticing it.
So with passwords and 2fa the attacker could login to Coinbase too.
Ever since then I've been getting hundreds or thousands of Google notifications I've had to decline. Anyone know how people are able to send out hundreds of 2FA gmail notification popups without Google blocking this?
Most clued-up places enable you to register a Yubikey as 2FA.
So then it doesn't matter if you loose your OTP app and your backup codes because you've still got a Yubikey.
(And those that don't allow Yubikey, almost certainly will have SMS as a secondary option).
Google Authenticator can be local-only or synced to the cloud.
In local-only mode, the authenticator is bound to a specific device. You can manually sync it to additional devices, but if you lose access to all those devices, it's game over, you will get locked out of whatever accounts you secured with authenticator as the second factor.
In cloud-synced mode, it's synced to your google account, so if you lose your phone, you can restore authenticator state. But if your google account gets taken over, it's game over, the attacker has your authentication codes.
Never understood this convenience and never will. This is exactly the wrong way to deal with people losing their authenticator secrets.
I'm not sure if I have the same password reset flow as OP, but when I try to reset my password and even provide the 2fa code, it basically doesn't let me get past a certain point without contacting my backup email address or making me use a phone which I'm logged in on to complete the reset
A warning to auth engineers: if an account is using a Gmail address, then auth codes from Google Authenticator should not be considered a second factor.
At least now more companies include a "never read this over the phone" note in their authentication texts.
Part of the blame should be levied on Coinbase if this is the case.
(I'm assuming this guy at least uses unique passwords...)
> Google had cloud-synced my codes.
> That was the master key. Within minutes, he was inside my Coinbase account.
The author wrote "codes", not "passwords".
It kinda sucks that in 2025, voice calls are now near-zero trust.
Is there really no velocity behind any open/consortium replacement to traditional voice calls?
Never act based solely on an unsolicited telephone call or email.
I do see why Google did it; it's going to be difficult to educate users to always set up 2FA both on a primary and a backup device. Much easier and convenient to automatically sync different devices. But your story makes it obvious that something isn't quite right here.
Google has dozens of properties and it is easy to generate an email from one of them that seems to confirm the attacker's identity. Never trust any of these to identify a legitimate representative.
It's happened lots of times and it's why traditional banks are way more secure than crypto.
Well done to the author for talking about it, but I hope the real lesson is learned that crypto isn't a real store of wealth and can be stolen at any time....
latchkey•1h ago
https://x.com/0xzak/status/1967592307714379934
ncr100•48m ago
A Horrific threat.
clgeoio•45m ago