Crypto stories need evidence.Open methods · Traceable sources →
C✓WhyCoinMovesTHE EVIDENCE DESK
EN ▾
EN中文한국어日本語
← BTC event archive

Electrum patched a wallet flaw that let rogue servers steal bitcoin

Electrum disclosed that malicious servers could replace unconfirmed payments in its wallet, then sign a valid replacement sending coins to the attacker once users raised the fee. The developers reported at least one theft and released version 4.8.3, which checks signatures on unconfirmed transactions.

Evidence strength Single source

Only one publisher so far. Another independent outlet or an official source would raise it.

ImportanceHigh

Security topic · core coin BTC

UrgencyUrgent

Fresh security news

Rule-based signals, not the probability that the report is true. How they work →

Key facts

Attributed sources: CoinDesk

BTC after this site detected it

  • 5 minutes+0.08%Gate · USDT
  • 1 hour+0.07%Gate · USDT
  • 24 hours—Window not complete
Source published First received Updated UTC

Claims and open questions

What sources claim

  • Electrum said it received two reports in October, including one from a user who lost funds on Oct. 18 after approving a fee increase on a substituted transaction; developers have not disclosed the amount stolen.
  • Before the fix, the wallet trusted outside servers to report pending transactions without checking whether their signatures were valid, and attackers also generated receiving addresses whose last four characters matched the legitimate destination.
  • Electrum released version 4.8.3 on Oct. 24 adding signature checks for unconfirmed transactions, but earlier versions remain vulnerable when connected to malicious servers.

Still unresolved

  • Which servers carried out the attack, and what on-chain data would identify the addresses that received the stolen coins?
  • Will Electrum publish the total amount lost, and will the theft be confirmed in an official statement or filing?

Model-assisted explanation; citations, numbers and output format are checked. This is not independent semantic verification.

Source evidence

1
CoinDeskNews publisher
Bitcoin wallet bug let rogue servers steal funds when users tried to speed up payments ↗

www.coindesk.com

Published 26/10/2026, 05:15 · Received 26/10/2026, 05:17

Original source titles remain in their source language. Full articles are not republished.

Market reaction after detection

Returns start at the sample closest to site detection (within the same minute up to 10 minutes later), using the same data source and quote currency. Actual sample times are shown; missing observations remain blank.

Observed returns after site detection
WindowReturnActual sampled interval / source
5 minutes+0.08%26/10/2026, 05:17 → 26/10/2026, 05:22 (UTC)
Gate · USDT
1 hour+0.07%26/10/2026, 05:17 → 26/10/2026, 06:17 (UTC)
Gate · USDT
24 hours—Awaiting a complete valid window

Historical market context

Research: hourly returns and BTC beta →

Closed hourly candles from the 30 days before this event observation. Different venues are kept separate.

Prior 30-day hourly baseline
MetricValue
Hourly coverage100.0% (720/720)
Median absolute 1h return0.14%
99th percentile of absolute 1h returns1.01%

OKX · USDT · Context as of 26/10/2026, 05:17 · Last included candle closed 26/10/2026, 05:00

Hourly descriptive statistics, not minute-move probabilities. Backfilled history never moves the observation cutoff above.

Event timeline

Source publication, receipt and analysis times are separate. All times UTC.

  1. Source published: CoinDesk

  2. Source received: CoinDesk

  3. Event first detected by this site

  4. Evidence record updated

  5. English explanation generated

  6. Latest content update

Recent BTC events and market reactions

Full coin archive →

Get the next BTC event with its sources: Follow BTC by RSS →

Research for this archive