In the first half of 2024 alone, over 260,000 users fell victim to phishing attacks on EVM chains, resulting in staggering losses of $314 million. Shockingly, one individual lost $11 million, marking the second-largest theft in history. These figures, highlighted in a recent Scam Sniffer report, underscore a critical reality: phishing remains a dominant threat in the Web3 ecosystem.
Most ERC-20 token thefts stem from users unknowingly signing malicious signatures, such as Permit, IncreaseAllowance, or Uniswap Permit2. High-value attacks often target staking, restaking, Aave collateral, and Pendle tokens, with victims frequently lured via fake Twitter comments directing them to phishing sites.
As a foundational gateway for user transactions, OKX Web3 Wallet has intensified its focus on security enhancements and user education. The platform recently upgraded its risk interception capabilities to address high-frequency phishing scenarios, with plans to expand these protections further. This article breaks down OKX Web3 Wallet’s four key risk interception features, explains common attack vectors, and offers practical insights to help you stay secure.
Understanding Common Phishing Mechanisms
Phishing attacks in Web3 often exploit user trust and technical nuances. Here’s a quick overview of prevalent methods:
- Approve: A standard ERC-20 function allowing smart contracts to spend tokens on your behalf. Pre-authorizing malicious contracts can lead to immediate token drains.
- Permit: An ERC-20 extension enabling token approvals via signatures instead of on-chain transactions. Phishers trick users into signing these offline, bypassing gas fees and leaving no trace in the victim’s wallet.
- Permit2: A Uniswap innovation streamlining approvals with single gas payments. However, unlimited approvals here can be exploited if users interact with phishing dApps.
Offline signatures like Permit and Permit2 are especially insidious, as authorization traces only appear in the phisher’s wallet, not the victim’s. This opacity makes them a prime tool for attackers.
1. Malicious EOA Account Authorizations
Recent months have seen significant losses from signature-based phishing. On June 26, a user lost $217,000 to a fake Blast website after signing multiple phishing signatures. On July 3, ZachXBT reported a victim losing 6 BAYC NFTs and 40 Beans (worth over $1 million) to a phishing scheme. Another incident on July 24 involved a Pendle user losing $4.69 million in PENDLEPT restaking tokens due to Permit signatures.
These attacks typically trick users into authorizing externally owned accounts (EOAs)—addresses controlled by individuals rather than smart contracts. Hackers disguise these requests as promotional offers or airdrops, prompting users to grant spending permissions to malicious EOAs.
EOA (Externally Owned Account): A user-controlled account on blockchains like Ethereum, distinct from smart contract accounts. Regular dApp interactions should only involve authorizations to project smart contracts, not personal EOAs.
OKX Web3 Wallet now scans for EOA authorization attempts. If a signature request targets an EOA instead of a contract, the wallet triggers a warning or blocks the transaction, preventing inadvertent approvals.
2. Malicious Owner Changes
This attack vector primarily affects chains like TRON and Solana, where account ownership structures are inherent. Signing a malicious transaction can transfer your account’s “Owner”权限 (permission), yielding full control to an attacker.
TRON’s multi-signature system includes three permission levels:
- Owner Permission: Highest authority, allowing modifications to all other permissions.
- Witness Permission: Tied to super representative voting and governance.
- Active Permission: Used for daily operations like transfers and smart contract calls.
Hackers may obtain your private key or seed phrase and then assign Owner/Active permissions to their address. In some cases, they exploit TRON’s design to directly transfer these permissions, stripping you of control. Even if you retain technical ownership, assets become inaccessible without the attacker’s co-signature.
Due to the severe risk, OKX Web3 Wallet outright blocks transactions attempting to modify Owner permissions, safeguarding users from catastrophic account takeovers.
3. Malicious Transfer Address Changes
Flawed dApp contract designs can facilitate address manipulation attacks. On March 5, an address lost 4 stETH ($14,199) from EigenLayer after signing a ‘queueWithdrawal’ phishing transaction.
Angel Drainer, a phishing group, tailored an exploit for EigenLayer’s Strategy Manager contract. By approving a ‘queueWithdrawal’ function, users unknowingly authorized attackers to redirect staking rewards to a malicious address. Attackers used CREATE2 mechanisms to generate deceptive addresses, evading conventional security tools that misclassified these transactions as benign.
Similar vulnerabilities have emerged across multiple ecosystems, where poorly designed contracts allow hackers to alter destination addresses post-approval. OKX Web3 Wallet monitors for abnormal address changes during transactions, alerting users to discrepancies that could indicate manipulation.
4. Similar Address Transfers
This classic scam involves deceiving users into sending funds to addresses resembling their intended recipient’s. Attackers generate addresses with matching first and last characters, exploiting users’ tendency to skim rather than verify full addresses.
On May 3, a whale lost 1,155 WBTC (~$70 million) to a same-prefix-suffix attack. The hacker fabricated an address matching the victim’s target in the first four and last six characters (excluding 0x). After the victim initiated a transfer, the attacker sent a negligible amount (0 ETH) from the phishing address to the victim’s wallet, embedding the fake address in the transaction history. When the victim later copied this address from their history, they inadvertently sent massive funds to the scammer.
OKX Web3 Wallet incorporates address similarity checks, flagging transfers to addresses that closely resemble past transactions or known contacts. This reduces the risk of human error in address validation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes EOA authorizations risky?
EOAs are individual-controlled addresses, not audited smart contracts. Authorizing them grants direct spending power to potential attackers, unlike contract-limited approvals.
How can I avoid Permit phishing?
Always verify the requesting site’s authenticity. Use wallets like OKX Web3 that intercept high-risk signatures and avoid signing offline approvals for unfamiliar dApps. 👉 Explore advanced security strategies
Why are Owner permission changes blocked?
Owner privileges allow full account control. Malicious changes can irrevocably transfer ownership, making proactive blocking essential for asset safety.
What should I do if I suspect a similar address scam?
Manually verify the full address, not just prefixes/suffixes. Use wallet features that highlight address differences and check transaction histories meticulously.
Can malicious address changes be reversed?
Once executed, such transactions are typically irreversible. Prevention via wallet security features is critical.
How does OKX Web3 Wallet stay updated on new threats?
The team continuously monitors emerging phishing tactics and upgrades interception algorithms to cover novel risk scenarios.
Conclusion
The first half of 2024 reiterated the persistent threat of phishing in Web3, from airdrop scams to compromised official accounts. While opportunities abound, vigilance is non-negotiable. Deepening your security knowledge and leveraging robust wallets are paramount steps toward safeguarding your assets. OKX Web3 Wallet’s enhanced risk interception features provide a critical layer of defense, but user awareness remains the first line of protection.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It does not offer investment advice, legal guidance, or solicitations to trade digital assets. Digital asset holdings involve high risk; assess your suitability and consult professionals before proceeding. Always comply with local laws and regulations.