TL;DR
Get hardware and tech essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Elliptic found no evidence that AI agents made decisions while North Korean hackers moved funds stolen in the Oct. 29 Binance hack. The firm says the transfers resemble automated scripts supervised by people; about $2.85 billion has been frozen or seized, while roughly $3.28 billion remains under hacker control.
Blockchain analytics firm Elliptic says it has found no evidence that artificial intelligence directed the laundering of funds stolen in the Oct. 29 Binance hack. The firm’s review found rapid, automated transfers through crypto services, but said the activity appeared consistent with scripts written and supervised by people—not AI agents making decisions independently.
The FBI attributed the theft to North Korea’s TraderTraitor hacking group and asked cryptocurrency services to block transactions linked to wallets holding the stolen funds. Elliptic said the hackers used about 20 automated software services to move funds through decentralized exchanges, lending protocols and cross-chain bridges in less than three days.
Elliptic co-founder and chief scientist Tom Robinson said the observed transfers did not show AI agents choosing routes or changing plans. The firm described repeated transfers, failed transactions and reused amounts as patterns consistent with preset instructions. It also said the hackers tested routes with small transfers before moving larger sums.
According to Elliptic, $2.85 billion, or 44% of the stolen funds, has been frozen or seized. The hackers still control about $3.28 billion across more than 950 wallets. Most of the remaining assets are held in bitcoin and ether, which cannot be frozen by a central stablecoin issuer, Elliptic said; only a negligible amount appears to have been converted into cash.
What the Laundering Evidence Shows
The distinction between automated software and autonomous AI matters because rapid transactions alone do not show that a system made its own decisions. Elliptic’s assessment pushes back on speculation that AI agents were selecting services and adapting routes during the laundering. It does not establish that AI played no role at all; the firm says the evidence it examined does not demonstrate such involvement.
The investigation also shows the scale of the recovery challenge. Although a substantial share of the stolen funds has been frozen or seized, billions remain spread across hundreds of wallets. The asset mix matters: stablecoin issuers may be able to freeze tokens under their control, while bitcoin and ether do not have a central issuer able to perform the same action. The remaining funds may therefore be harder to immobilize through issuer action alone.
Products Worth Considering
Ledger Flex + Folio Crypto Hardware Wallet
Trezor Safe 7 Crypto Hardware Wallet
Trezor Safe 5 Crypto Hardware Wallet with Color Touchscreen, Black Graphite
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Tracing Funds After the Oct. 29 Theft
The FBI identified TraderTraitor as responsible for the Oct. 29 theft and urged crypto services to block transactions associated with wallets tied to the funds. Elliptic’s report focuses on what happened after the theft: how money that escaped initial freezes was routed and whether the movement showed signs of AI decision-making.
Elliptic said six cross-chain bridges were used for the first time within a 100-minute period on Oct. 30. That timing shows how quickly the funds were routed across services, but the firm said it cannot determine from the evidence whether people or AI systems selected those bridges. Elliptic also identified about $16 million sent to addresses holding proceeds from September’s Bitget exploit, which it said suggests the same laundering operation may be handling funds from both attacks.
“Our assessment is that the laundering is automated, but nothing we have seen shows an AI agent making decisions. The pattern fits scripts written and supervised by people.”
— Tom Robinson, Elliptic co-founder and chief scientist
Questions About AI and Recovery
Elliptic has not ruled out AI involvement; it says only that the transactions reviewed do not show an AI agent making decisions. The firm could not establish who selected the six bridges first used within the 100-minute window, or whether any AI tools were involved elsewhere in the operation. Its assessment is limited to the evidence it examined.
The full disposition of the stolen funds also remains unsettled. Elliptic reported that about $3.28 billion remains under hacker control, but the source material does not specify what share investigators or services might be able to freeze next, how quickly further tracing could proceed, or whether more funds have moved since the figures were reported. The reported $16 million link to addresses associated with the Bitget exploit does not, by itself, establish who operated the addresses or prove that the same people carried out both attacks.
Further Tracing and Freeze Requests
Crypto services have been asked by the FBI to block transactions linked to wallets associated with the theft. Investigators and blockchain analytics firms are continuing to trace the funds, while the reported balances and freezes may change as assets move or are identified. The source report does not provide a timetable for additional seizures or a further public update from the FBI.
For now, the clearest next developments to watch are whether services freeze or seize more assets, whether investigators publish additional attribution or tracing findings, and whether new evidence clarifies if AI tools played any role. Until then, Elliptic’s finding is limited: the activity it reviewed looks like human-supervised automation, with no evidence presented of AI agents making laundering decisions.
Key Questions
Did Elliptic find that AI laundered the stolen Binance funds?
No. Elliptic said it found no evidence that an AI agent made decisions about how to move the funds. It said the observed activity fit automated scripts supervised by people.
Who did the FBI say was behind the theft?
The FBI attributed the Oct. 29 theft to North Korea’s TraderTraitor hacking group and asked cryptocurrency services to block transactions connected to the stolen funds.
How much of the stolen money has been frozen or seized?
Elliptic reported that about $2.85 billion, or 44% of the stolen funds, had been frozen or seized. It said roughly $3.28 billion remained under hacker control across more than 950 wallets.
Why does the type of cryptocurrency matter?
Elliptic said most remaining assets are held in bitcoin and ether. Unlike stablecoins with a central issuer, those assets cannot be frozen by a central issuer, which limits one potential route for immobilizing funds.
Has Elliptic ruled out any AI involvement?
No. Elliptic has not ruled out AI involvement; it said the transactions it examined did not show AI making decisions. The report also says it could not determine whether humans or AI systems selected some of the bridges used.
Source: coindesk.com
