The chain data show that a user misdirected about 1.42 million ANSEM coins this week to the contractual address of the token rather than the target wallet. At current prices, the value of the asset was approximately $226,000, and the associated currency approximate rate was no longer recoverable.

Transfer Object Error

Public transaction records show that the transfer involved 1,342,084 ANSEMs. The funds were not entered into the wallet of another user, but directly into the contractual address of the token.

Such addresses are usually used for the deployment and administration of token contracts and do not assume the collection and transfer functions for general wallets. If the contract itself does not provide for a withdrawal mechanism, the misdirected token is often permanently locked.

It wasn't an attack, it was an error.

From the information currently disclosed, the incident was not a hacker attack, fishing fraud or agreement breach, but a simple copying error. The sender may have copied ANSEM ' s contractual address and erroneously entered the receipt address column at the time the transfer was made.

The chain analysis account, Lokonchain, also referred to the transaction and stated that the user had lost all of its tokens by miscopying the contract address.

  • Number of misdirected: 1,342,084 ANSEM
  • At current prices: approximately US$ 226,256
  • Transfer to address type: ANSEM token contract address

Transfer risk on the retrace chain

The incident once again revealed an old problem of encrypted transfers: once the transaction was identified on the chain, it could not normally be withdrawn. Unlike traditional bank transfers, chain transactions generally do not have artificial passenger service, revocation of access or non-payment mechanisms.

For ordinary users, wallet addresses are often a long string of characters that are difficult to identify in a short time. The closeness of the contractual address to the address of the individual wallet, input errors or copy errors may directly result in loss of assets.

Common risk-reduction practices include sending a small test transaction, checking several characters at the receiving address and confirming whether the targeted address is a personal wallet or a smart contract address. For large transfers, it took dozens of additional seconds to review, at a cost well below the loss of a single misdirection.