In October, China criticized the United States over a significant cryptocurrency hack involving $13 billion, one of the largest breaches in history, which targeted a major mining pool and allowed attackers to gain control over around 6% of Bitcoin’s network hashrate.
LuBian, the mining pool, faced the repercussions of this hack, recognized only later by Arkham Intelligence. They finally announced their findings with considerable fanfare on August 2, 2025.
Interestingly, the hackers didn’t touch the stolen funds for four years, which is pretty unusual and raises questions about their intentions. The stolen assets were then shifted to a different wallet in June 2024 and stayed there.
On October 14, 2025, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice (DoJ) charged a man named Chen Zhi with the indictment, claiming they had seized a cache of Bitcoin.
LuBian’s Own Blunder or a State-Sponsored Hack?
Because LuBian relied on a weak entropy source when creating private keys, hackers could figure out the private keys for several operational wallets.
The DoJ initiated a civil forfeiture action for 127,272 Bitcoins, marking it as the largest forfeiture attempt by the U.S. They alleged that the accused masterminded a large-scale online fraud operation tied to human trafficking, implicating Chen Zhi and his organization in deeply unethical practices.
This claim of association between the seized tokens and Chen’s operations brings to light the extent of the exploitation embedded in his business dealings.
Pig slaughtering isn’t new, but the sheer scale of it has alarmed law enforcement and the public. This situation highlights how dire and ruthless operations have become.
There may very well be disputes over the proceeds of these illegal activities. A relevant comparison can be drawn to a fierce legal battle where Spanish and Colombian governments are negotiating over a shipwreck full of treasure valued at around $10 billion.
LuBian’s Massive Mining Pool
The mining pool, while trying to celebrate its first year of operation, suffered a theft of over 90% of its Bitcoin in December 2020. Arkham Intelligence reported that a substantial amount of BTC was hacked on December 28, 2020, followed by another $6 million stolen the next day from LuBian’s accounts.
LuBian was desperate enough to spend 1.4 BTC sending out numerous pleas in the form of OP_RETURN messages, hoping to convince the hackers to return the stolen coins.
Moreover, the National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center reported that a significant amount of Bitcoin linked to the U.S. government aligns closely with what was stolen during the LuBian incident.
Who is Responsible? Many Clues
A report noted that a third-party key generator with vulnerabilities was discovered, implying similar weaknesses in the LuBian pool. The addresses exposed in the hack matched those mentioned in the U.S. indictment.
Arkham Intelligence also pointed out that an unusual transfer occurred from LuBian’s main Bitcoin wallet, which coincided with the amount referenced in the indictment. Once moved, those stolen Bitcoins remained inactive until June 2024, only to be shifted again later without any contact or movement since.
It’s worth noting that the U.S. did not clarify when or how these Bitcoins were confiscated, leaving some questions unanswered.
The Chinese Cyber Security Agency claimed that the U.S. might have utilized hacking measures in 2020 to seize those Bitcoins, suggesting it was a well-coordinated operation by a state-sponsored hacking group.
Escalating Complaints from China
No concrete evidence has surfaced that confirms this was a covert initiative by the U.S., but certain patterns align with that possibility. The idea that the U.S. might have been attempting to undermine Chen’s operations by targeting his digital assets is not far-fetched.
Earlier, in August, China accused the U.S. of exploiting vulnerabilities in Microsoft services, followed by a complaint in November regarding a cyber attack against the National Time Service Center.
While the U.S. government’s involvement in aggressive cyber actions against China remains unconfirmed, the tension is palpable.
