On July 19, 2025, Indian crypto exchange CoinDCX confirmed a major security breach involving approximately $44 million. The platform issued public reassurances: “Customer funds are 100% safe,” again and again, and said only an operational wallet was impacted.
To their credit, the message was calm and confident. But was it really transparent? Did they act quickly and take responsibility—or did the truth come out only after public pressure?
This post takes a closer look, not to sensationalize, but to ask the questions any responsible crypto user or investor should be asking.
What Happened: A Breakdown of the Hack
Here’s what we know about the incident:
A hacker drained $44.2 million from one of CoinDCX’s liquidity-providing wallets on the Solana network.
The attacker funded the exploit using just 1 ETH from Tornado Cash to hide their origin.
Roughly $15.8 million of the stolen funds were bridged to Ethereum and moved around.
This wasn’t a smart contract vulnerability. It was a targeted compromise of an exchange-controlled wallet—a centralized failure in security.
“They Disclosed It Early”? Not Exactly.
Contrary to popular belief, CoinDCX did not disclose the hack themselves.
Here’s the real timeline:
Blockchain security firm Cyvers Alerts detected the suspicious outflows and raised a red flag.
On-chain investigator @zachxbt detected confirmed that CoinDCX was the compromised party.
Only after these public disclosures, nearly 17 hours later, did CoinDCX issue its first public statement acknowledging the hack.
So while the messaging from CoinDCX was composed, it was not proactive. In crypto, where real-time transparency is critical, waiting until after exposure is not commendable—it’s reactive damage control.
CoinDCX’s Official Claims – And What’s Still Missing
Let’s walk through CoinDCX’s public statements, and ask the hard but fair questions any user would:
Claim 1: “Customer Funds Are Safe.”
CoinDCX insists that the breach only impacted a company wallet, and that user assets are untouched.
But what does “safe” really mean without proof?
There is no Proof of Liabilities (PoL).
CoinDCX hasn’t disclosed how much it owes users in total. Without this, no one can verify if reserves cover 100% of obligations.There is no independent audit by a licensed firm like Deloitte or Armanino.
They cite “CoinGabbar” as their reserve auditor—but CoinGabbar is a data aggregator, not a formal audit firm.
In other words: users are being asked to trust CoinDCX’s word. That’s not enough anymore.
Claim 2: “Funds Are Held in Segregated Cold Wallets.”
That sounds reassuring. But let’s unpack it.
“Segregated” at a technical level (i.e., separate wallets) is not the same as legally segregated user funds.
Are user funds held in trust, or can they be used to cover company liabilities if needed?
If CoinDCX were to face insolvency from this $44M hit, would customer funds be ring-fenced?
So far, no legal structure or fund segregation agreement has been disclosed. The segregation claim remains unverified and unenforced.
Claim 3: “CoinDCX Will Absorb All Losses.”
A bold claim—and if true, commendable.
But here’s the problem: there’s NO public balance sheet, NO independent reserve certification, and NO information about whether the company has the capital reserves to absorb this loss without dipping into customer assets.
For a private company with unknown liabilities, this should not be taken at face value.
What Real Transparency Looks Like
It’s time to move beyond surface-level PR. If CoinDCX truly wants to lead the Indian crypto ecosystem post-crisis, here’s what it should do now:
✅ 1. Publish Total Liabilities
Disclose the full amount of customer deposits, by token. That’s the only way to validate the “1:1 backing” claim.
✅ 2. Commission an Independent Audit
A licensed, third-party auditor (not a data website) should validate reserves, liabilities, and legal segregation of funds.
✅ 3. Disclose Legal Protections
Make public any trust structure or regulatory framework that ensures customer funds cannot be touched—even in a crisis.
The Recovery Bounty: A Distraction?
CoinDCX launched a 25% bounty for information that leads to the recovery of stolen funds. This is a welcome move. But recovery efforts don’t replace accountability.
It’s a good step—but it doesn’t resolve the core issue:
How can users trust a platform that hasn't yet proven its solvency, security, or segregation of funds?
Why This Matters
CoinDCX isn’t a small exchange. It’s one of India’s largest crypto platforms, with lakhs of users and deep ties to global investors. What it does—or doesn’t do—sets the tone for how Indian exchanges are perceived globally.
Final Thoughts
Crypto doesn’t need perfect platforms—it needs accountable ones.
CoinDCX still has a chance to do the right thing. But that starts with disclosure, not just damage control. If user funds are truly safe, prove it—don’t just say it.
Because in crypto, trust isn’t built with tweets.
It’s built with receipts.
Top comments (0)