Following a Balance Across Three Networks
A client's wallet, used actively across several decentralized finance protocols, was drained after signing a malicious token approval. The stolen balance moved across three separate blockchain networks within under an hour.
The Situation
A client's wallet, used actively across several decentralized finance protocols, was drained after signing a malicious token approval. The stolen balance moved across three separate blockchain networks within under an hour.
The Challenge
Each network involved has its own explorer, transaction format, and bridge protocol, meaning the trail had to be reassembled from three separate public ledgers rather than one.
The Investigation
We correlated each bridge transaction by matching transferred amounts, net of fees, against timing across all three networks' public records.
Findings
The asset began on Ethereum, moved to an alternative network, then moved again to a network with comparatively limited transaction monitoring visibility.
Outcome
A complete cross network map was delivered to the client, identifying the final network and wallet cluster where the assets currently sit.
Lessons
Movement across networks meaningfully slows an investigation but rarely stops it outright. Each bridge transaction leaves its own public record to correlate against.
Origin Wallet
Drained via a malicious token approval.
Facing a similar situation?
Every case is scoped on its own facts. Tell us what happened.