GIWA

crypto scams

2026-09-29 04:30:57

2026 crypto scam guide lists 12 common fraud schemes, from fake mainnets to account takeovers

TechFlowPost has published a 2026 crypto scam guide that groups common fraud tactics into five categories and 12 specific schemes, using the recent fake GIWA mainnet incident as a starting point. Written by Changan from the Biteye content team, the piece argues that the most dangerous part of crypto fraud is not only technical trickery, but the constant reshaping of familiar attack surfaces such as X posts, Telegram chats, Google search results, Discord verification flows, wallet history, mobile apps, and exchange recovery processes. The article details several patterns: fake project websites amplified by KOL reposts, fake recruiting and investment outreach that deliver malware through meeting plugins or coding tests, stolen influencer accounts used to launch tokens, Telegram impersonation and code theft, search-engine phishing pages, Discord wallet-drainer verification, fake airdrop emails, address poisoning, fake mainnets and fake bridges, malicious app updates, and exchange account resets backed by forged identity materials. It also cites examples including a fake Hyperliquid site that led to the theft of about 550,000 USDC and the fake GIWA mainnet, where 1,335 addresses sent roughly 767.65 ETH and about 766.25 ETH was drained. Its practical advice is consistent throughout: verify official channels, never share login codes or 2FA credentials, isolate devices from large holdings, review exchange permissions beyond just passwords, and treat every link, signature request, and software download with suspicion.

10

DYORSWAP

2026-09-28 13:08:04

DYORSWAP users sent 767.65 ETH to a fake GIWA bridge after spoofed chain passed checks

DYORSWAP, a multi-chain decentralized exchange, said scammers tricked it into integrating a fake version of the upcoming GIWA blockchain over the weekend, leading users to send funds to a spoofed bridge contract. The incident resulted in roughly $2 million in losses, with DYORSWAP later saying 1,335 addresses bridged a total of 767.65 ETH and that almost all of it was drained. According to the exchange, the fake OP Stack chain used the same chain ID as the legitimate GIWA network, 9134, which made it appear valid during DYORSWAP’s initial verification. DYORSWAP also pointed to suspicious messages that may have spread false information inside its community. The bridge contract was deployed shortly after 6 PM UTC on Saturday and emptied a little more than 12 hours later, with proceeds later moved into Tornado Cash. GIWA’s official X account denied that its mainnet existed, but the denial came only minutes before the fake bridge was drained. DYORSWAP said users who bridged less than 5 ETH would receive a 40% refund, while larger cases would be reviewed individually. In a later update, it said it had already distributed more than 200 ETH in compensation and identified addresses it believes were involved in the scam, allegedly funded from Binance and Gate.

20

GIWA

2026-09-28 12:14:29

Fake GIWA Layer 2 bridge loses 766.25 ETH after DYORSWAP misidentified network

A fake Layer 2 network posing as GIWA, which The Defiant described as being backed by Upbit, had 766.25 ETH drained from its Ethereum bridge on Sept. 27, with the amount valued at roughly $2 million in the report. According to The Defiant, the loss happened after decentralized exchange DYORSWAP mistook the fake network for the legitimate GIWA chain. Ethereum transaction data cited in the report shows the transfer moving out from the bridge address 0xbA9938…435ab2. The summary available in the source does not provide additional operational details beyond the transfer, the date, the amount, and the address reference.

20

crypto scams

2026-09-28 11:02:00

Fake Mainnets, Poisoned Addresses and Drainers: A 2026 Guide to Common Crypto Scams

PANews published a long-form scam guide by Biteye that uses the fake GIWA mainnet incident as its opening case and then walks through several of the most common fraud patterns seen in crypto in 2026. The piece argues that the most dangerous part of today’s scam market is not just technical sophistication, but the constant ability of attackers to reshape old tricks into forms users have not seen before. The article breaks the risks into several buckets: phishing links amplified on X, fake hiring and investment outreach that leads targets to run malware, hijacked KOL accounts used to launch tokens or promote trades, Telegram impersonation and account takeovers, fake Google search results, Discord verification drainer flows, email airdrop lures, address poisoning, fake mainnets and fake bridges, malicious apps, and exchange account resets obtained with forged identity materials. Among the concrete cases cited, the GIWA scam stands out. According to the article, GIWA had disclosed Chain ID 9134, but its mainnet had not officially launched and there was no official RPC or bridge. Attackers built a fake “GIWA Mainnet” using the real Chain ID, and 1,335 addresses eventually sent about 767.65 ETH to it. Roughly 766.25 ETH was drained, for losses approaching $2 million.

20

DYORSWAP

2026-09-28 09:19:50

Fake GIWA network drains about $2 million in ETH after DYORSWAP mistakes it for mainnet

A fake blockchain posing as GIWA’s mainnet siphoned roughly $2 million in Ether from users through a bridge that decentralized exchange DYORSWAP initially treated as legitimate. In a reconstruction released Monday, DYORSWAP said the fraudulent bridge took in about 767.65 ETH from 1,335 addresses, with 766.25 ETH later drained by the scammers. GIWA, an Ethereum layer-2 network built by Upbit operator Dunamu, said on Sunday that its mainnet had not launched and that connection details circulating online were false. The project stated plainly that it does not currently have a mainnet running. DYORSWAP said its own contracts were not compromised and that it is tracing the bridge deployer, funding sources, suspected test wallets and recipient addresses. The exchange also said it used its own funds to compensate affected users with more than 200 ETH. Dunamu launched GIWA’s Sepolia testnet in September 2025 on Optimism’s OP Stack, and in April it agreed with Hana Financial and POSCO International to test a GIWA Chain-based cross-border remittance system using real trade transactions.

30

Federal Reser

2026-09-28 02:00:57

Fed seeks comment on stablecoin rules under Genius Act as Bitget sets phased withdrawal restart

The U.S. Federal Reserve Board has opened a public comment process on two proposals tied to the Genius Act, laying out how regulated payment stablecoin issuers could be supervised. One proposal would require stablecoins to be fully backed by reserve assets such as short-term Treasuries and other high-quality liquid assets, while also standardizing capital and risk-management requirements. The second would establish the administrative process for banks applying to issue payment stablecoins, including business-plan submissions, financial disclosures, hearings and final decisions. According to Cointelegraph, stakeholders will have 60 days to respond after the notice appears in the Federal Register. Elsewhere, Bitget said the vulnerability tied to its Sept. 24 security incident has been fixed and withdrawals will resume in stages beginning Sept. 28. The exchange said user balances were unaffected, its protection fund would cover the financial impact, and Mandiant and SlowMist are assisting the investigation. GIWA, an Ethereum Layer 2 project developed by Upbit parent Dunamu, separately said its mainnet has not launched and that there is no RPC leak risk. THORChain and AMLBot also addressed fund flows linked to the Bitget case, while Michael Saylor posted another Bitcoin Tracker update that may precede new holdings data.

20

DYORSWAP

2026-09-28 00:12:15

DYORSWAP says fake GIWA incident was a scam network, with about 766 ETH moved out and over 200 ETH repaid

DYORSWAP said in an official statement that the so-called GIWA mainnet 9134 incident was not caused by a vulnerability in the DYOR contract. Instead, the team said the losses were tied to a fraudulent network impersonating GIWA Chain 9134. According to the statement, the network had a bridge and batcher resembling OP Stack infrastructure and was deployed at 02:10:59 on Sept. 27, 2026, UTC+8. Roughly 8.5 hours before deployment, the address received about 0.045 ETH from an address linked to ChangeHero. On-chain data cited by DYORSWAP shows that 1,335 addresses bridged in about 767.65 ETH in total, and around 766.25 ETH was ultimately transferred out through the cross-chain bridge. DYORSWAP also said it has already used its own funds to compensate affected users with more than 200 ETH. The team added that it is still tracing the bridge deployer, the source of funds, early test wallets, and the later movement of the transferred assets.

20

GIWA

2026-09-27 11:20:04

GIWA says purported mainnet was fake chain as scam bridge moves more than 766 ETH

GIWA said the so-called GIWA Mainnet circulated earlier was a fake chain set up by scammers and warned users not to interact with any unofficial RPC endpoints, bridges or contracts until further notice. The team also told users not to send funds to related addresses. Earlier, some community members had linked the chain to Upbit, while trading activity emerged around tokens including $GIWACAT and $FAKER. Information cited in the report said false bridge and RPC details were spread in a DYOR group, after which DYORSWAPDEX deployed related markets and funds then crossed in to buy $FAKER. On-chain tracking shows the fake bridge has taken in more than 766 ETH. The funds first moved to an address ending in 4134, then to addresses ending in 6b60 and 3da4, and are still being moved. GIWA said it has contacted a professional security team to trace the fund flows and is preserving evidence including chat logs, RPC information, bridge addresses and transaction records. Eligibility determinations, loss verification and the scope of compensation will be announced after the investigation is completed.

20