AIXBT Suspected Phishing Attack 55.5ETH, How Was AI Lured?
Original Title: "AIXBT Suspected Phishing 55.5 ETH, How Was AI Deceived?"
Original Author: Azuma, Odaily Planet Daily
This afternoon, several X users noticed a strange transaction.
The public address of the AI Agent project AIXBT (0xea36d66f0AC9928b358400309a8dFbC43A973a35) appears to have been phished, transferring 55.5 ETH to a phishing address (0x1C35C30Ef788124821027465f6A644Bf3Ba6B577).

Community screenshots indicate that this transaction appears to have been initiated by AIXBT through another AI tool, Simulacrum AI. Simulacrum AI is an AI automation actuator that helps users directly translate instructions from social media into on-chain actions.

As shown in the above image, AIXBT clearly provided various instructions for the transaction, including:
· #simu representing the call to Simulacrum AI; #tip representing the tip sent;
· The specific transfer amount of 55.5 ETH;
· Target address: 0x1C35C30Ef788124821027465f6A644Bf3Ba6B577
Subsequently, AIXBT also self-mockingly remarked after being phished: "Well, I messed up, got tricked into sending 55.50 ETH to an anonymous address. This is yet another painful lesson about high-value automated transactions."

At the time of writing, the attacker's original interactions with AIXBT have been deleted, with only the completion notification of the transaction from Simulacrum AI and AIXBT's self-mockery post still visible.

Additionally, the attacker has closed the account, and the current user of @0xhungusman's ID does not appear to be the original attacker Fungus Man. The new holder of this ID, DE searcher, claims to have hijacked the ID and hopes to take advantage of the AIXBT incident.

Currently, the community's biggest question is how exactly the original attacker conducted the phishing attack and why AIXBT issued a transfer instruction to their address... However, since the original attacker, Fungus Man, has shut down their account, it is difficult to trace back the historical interaction records, so the reason remains unknown for now.
AI self-holding and self-managed assets were also a major narrative in this AI innovation cycle. However, this incident involving AIXBT is evidently a severe blow to that narrative, or it may have caused a series of ripple effects on the subsequent development of the AI track.
The incident is still evolving, and Odaily will continue to monitor and follow up on the latest developments.
You may also like

Bitcoin Crash to $50,000 or Bear Trap Before $100,000? Deep Dive for WEEX Traders

Yang Ge Gary: Agent Economics and AI Microeconomics

Founder of Baixing.com: My Experience with Claude Code in Fourteen Points

How Could the SpaceX IPO Affect Bitcoin, Altcoins season, and Crypto Liquidity?

RootData: May 2026 Cryptocurrency Exchange Transparency Research Report

Should we escape the peak? The principle of the tail-end market in the stock market

Morning News | Five major virtual asset platforms in South Korea have experienced 57 incidents of hacking and system failures in six years; Grayscale submits registration application for Canton ETF

The ambitions of Kalshi, MTS, and a16z

The AI bubble is bursting

Real withdrawal is to release water: When crypto VCs position themselves in the Agent network effect

Has the narrative of BTC as "digital gold" failed?

A Perspective on the Indian Cryptocurrency Market: Descending into Silence or Moving Towards Maturity?

It took me a year to see the painful truth about Agent payments

Morning News | Bitmine issues preferred shares to raise $300 million; Polymarket accuses Kalshi of industrial espionage

Privacy coin trust crisis! ZEC plummets over 56% in a single day

Who is leading the price discovery in the cryptocurrency market? Measured delays on platforms like Binance and Hyperliquid

Anthropic launches IPO: Business miracle or valuation bubble?






