On June 10, an unknown crypto user sent $ 130 to Ethereum (ETH). Such a transaction is usually harmless, but the user had to pay 10 668 ETH to transfer the funds.
That is, the user spent $ 2.6 million to send $ 130.
The story quickly spread in space and there was a lot of confusion about what exactly happened.
Some speculate that this is a form of money laundering. The person behind the transaction may write off the fee as an error, while others suggest that this is a problem in the user’s wallet software.
It seems that, confirming the latter theory, the same user spent another 10,668 ETH to resend a transaction, sixteen hours after the first. This time, $ 2.6 million in ETH was spent on a $ 87,000 cryptocurrency transfer.
The fact that this has happened twice suggests that there is an error in the software of the unknown user’s wallet. Larry Chermak of The Block speculates:
“This is from the same address with the same exact fee in ETH (10 668.73185). This reinforces the error theory and shows that it has not yet been eliminated. “
Cornell University’s professor of computer science, Emin Gun Sirer, says the problem has led to “two fields of exchange when accessing third-party information through the API .” This was a reference to the way in which the user probably intends to transfer 10 668 ETH to the destination address, but ultimately spends this amount as a transaction fee.
The group of miners who processed this transaction is Ethermine, a leading pool (pool) for digging, which represents a large part of the hashing power for processing Ethereum transactions. The company noticed the suspicious deal, marking it as a possible ” accident
“. Since then, Ethermine has abolished transaction fees of 10,668 ETH and called on the ” sender ” to “contact us via DM or our support portal” to refund.
This is a response similar to that of the Sparkpool pool. the group of miners, processed the first transaction fees of $ 2,6 millions. The manager of key accounts Sparkpool, Shelton Siu, told The Block, that wait “sender to connect, to find a solution.”
what would the unknown sender had to do is to contact the relevant emails of these companies, to prove that they have the address that sent these transactions to Etherium, and then go through the process of returning the funds.
The address is marked in particular by Etherscan, which publicly identifies addresses related to exchanges, hacks, companies or other notable entities and events in the cryptocurrency space. The fact that the address was created only on June 6 contributes to the mystery of this situation.