CoinDCX Recognizes a Loss of $16 Million on Old Deposit Addresses

Deposits on Old Addresses

CoinDCX recognized a loss of approximately $16 million related to deposit addresses that the platform considered withdrawn from the service after its 2025 hack. According to Crypto Briefing, the incident was reported on October 21, 2026. The company attributes it to a temporary failure of its automated deposit transfer system. Funds continued to arrive on the old addresses without being moved as expected to the platform's active wallets.

A deposit address can remain technically usable on a blockchain even when a company ceases to offer it to its clients. Removing it from an interface does not deactivate it at the network level. Funds can still reach it, especially if a sender retains this address in their transfer habits. Managing these old destinations therefore involves tracking arrivals and signing rights. The qualifier "withdrawn" describes an internal procedure here, not the disappearance of the address.

A Loss Announced as Absorbed

CoinDCX claims to have credited the affected users from its reserves and taken the loss on its own. The platform also states that trading was not interrupted. These elements remain attributed to the company: they should not be transformed into an independent finding covering all customer accounts. The announcement describes compensation already performed according to CoinDCX, not a future program that would require waiting for a launch after a new eligibility procedure.

The cited movements concern notably USDT and TRX on the TRON network. TRX is not an Ethereum secondary-layer token, and the described operations do not require assuming an incident on Ethereum. The network used, the stablecoin contract, and the platform's wallets fulfill different functions. A failure in the organization of a company's deposits can thus cause a loss without demonstrating a general failure of the blockchain protocol on which transfers are recorded.

Partial Freeze and Open Questions

Tether froze approximately $2.21 million of USDT associated with the incident on October 22, reports Crypto Briefing. This intervention covers part of the amounts concerned. A freeze limits the movements of the targeted tokens according to the mechanisms available to the issuer; it does not prove that the entirety of the funds has been recovered or refunded. The blocked amount and the total loss announced must therefore remain separate. The subsequent handling of the frozen funds constitutes a distinct step.

ZachXBT and Bitquery also reported activity on at least one address presented as withdrawn. Their observations question the operational timeline provided by the platform, without allowing the reconstruction of all its internal controls on their own. Public traces provide information on transfers; responsibilities and procedures require other elements. The follow-up of the incident now concerns the management of old addresses, the explanation of their activity, and the aftermath of the freeze, while maintaining the distinction between CoinDCX's statements and external observations.