BSV
$67.4
Vol 64.74m
-4.36%
BTC
$96485
Vol 53398.9m
-1.45%
BCH
$496.76
Vol 1036.56m
-2.72%
LTC
$94.28
Vol 1629.28m
-5.2%
DOGE
$0.41
Vol 15987.58m
-4.1%
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The sender of the two separate ETH transactions with a $2.6 million transaction fee attached has been revealed. South Korean peer-to-peer exchange Good Cycle has confirmed that they are the sender. On June 17, Good Cycle sent both Ethermine Pool and SparkPool a transaction from the address that sent the June 10 and June 11 transactions that said: “I am the sender.” 

eth-2-6m-transaction-fee-sender-comes-clean


What took so long?

Blockchain analytics firm PeckShield discovered that Good Cycle was the sender before Good Cycle reached out to Ethermine Pool and SparkPool themselves.

Peckshield said Good Cycle appears to be a Ponzi scheme, noting that its website has very weak security. The Good Cycle website even has a notice saying that they suffered from repeated hacks.

During Peckshield’s research, PeckShield’s vice president of research, Chiachih Wu, sent a transaction to the Good Cycle exchange. Wu noticed that the amount they sent to Good Cycle was immediately sent to the wallet address that sent the transactions that had the $2.6 million transaction fees attached, this indicated that Good Cycle is indeed the owner of the wallet. 

Will Good Cycle get a refund?

Ethermine Pool and SparkPool, the two Ethereum block reward transaction processors, that processed Good Cycle’s June 10 and June 11 transactions—with $2.6 million transaction fee attached to each transaction—were interested in coming to a resolution with the transaction sender. Both transaction processors believed that a transaction with an abnormally large transaction fee had to be a mistake. 

However, after four days, Ethermine Pool distributed the transaction fee amongst its miners. On June 16th, SparkPool made an announcement saying they were giving the sender of the transaction until June 17 at 15:30 (GMT+8), to reach out to them, otherwise, they said they would distribute the transaction fee amongst its miners—Good Cycle was able to reach out to them before their time limit was up. It is unclear if SparkPool and Good Cycle have begun their conversation about resolution, but SparkPool will most likely refund Good Cycle in some capacity.

Recommended for you

Lido DAO members liable for their actions, California judge rules
In a ruling that has sparked outrage among ‘Crypto Bros,’ the California judge said that Andreessen Horowitz and cronies are...
November 22, 2024
How Philippine Web3 startups can overcome adoption hurdles
Key players in the Web3 space were at the Future Proof Tech Summit, sharing their insights on how local startups...
November 22, 2024
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement