Pro-Israel Hackers Steal $90 Million In Iranian Crypto Heist, Then Lose All

A pro-Israel hacking group on Wednesday drained over $90 million worth of cryptocurrency from an Iranian exchange. But multiple crypto tracking firms believe that Gonjeshke Darande, or 'Predatory Sparrow' in Farsi, lost all of the proceeds from the heist after reportedly 'burning' them in the process.
The funds are now inaccessible after they were stored in 'vanity addresses' for which they do not have the cryptographic keys, The Guardian reported.
On June 18, the group said it hacked the Nobitex exchange, a day after claiming they destroyed data at Iran's state-owned Bank Sepah amid escalating tensions between Israel and the Islamic Republic.
Cryptocurrencies such as Doge, Ethereum and Bitcoin were taken from digital wallets on the Iranian exchange Nobitex, which has been connected to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
According to crypto tracking firm Elliptic, over $90 million in cryptocurrency was transferred from Nobitex crypto wallets to hacker addresses.
The stolen funds were routed to addresses containing some variation of the term 'F*ckIRGCterrorists'. In a social media post on X, Predatory Sparrow confirmed that it had targeted Nobitex and later released its source code.
'Predatory Sparrow would not have the private keys for the crypto addresses they sent the Nobitex funds to, and have effectively burned the funds in order to send Nobitex a political message,' Elliptic said.
Predatory Sparrow is frequently reported in Israeli media as having Israeli connections, although there has been no official proof of the hackers' identity or nationality. 'Although there is no confirmation yet that the funds were moved by Predatory Sparrow, the hack appears to be motivated by the recent escalation of tensions between Israel and Iran,' Elliptic added.
Nobitex claims to have over 7 million users and is Iran's main cryptocurrency exchange. Past investigations by independent reporters have revealed linkages between Nobitex and IRGC-linked ransomware operatives and individuals close to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.
The attack occurred amid growing tensions between Israel and Iran, with the two countries exchanging missile strikes, targeting crucial military installations.
On Thursday, the US said it would wait for another two weeks before getting directly involved in the conflict, while Russia warned Israel against targeting the Bushehr nuclear power plant.
Earlier, President Donald Trump said his patience was running out with Iran. He issued threats to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who then hit back, saying any intervention from the US would result in 'irreparable damage.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Standard

33 minutes ago

• Business Standard

What Happens if Trump Decides to Strike Iran or Assassinate Its Leader?

If President Trump decides to send American bombers to help Israel destroy an underground uranium enrichment facility in Iran, it will likely kick off a more dangerous phase in the war. And if the United States assassinates Iran's supreme leader, as Trump hinted was possible, there are no guarantees he will be replaced by a friendlier leader. Iran's autocratic clerical leadership, which has ruled for nearly half a century since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, has proved its staying power, even in the face of multiple domestic uprisings. Demolishing Fordo, the enrichment site buried deep in a mountain, may not obliterate Iran's nuclear program and could lead the country to broaden the war or accelerate that program. Here are some ways it could play out if the United States enters the war. Iran could negotiate Before Israel launched a surprise attack on Iran's nuclear program and other targets last week, Iran and the United States were discussing limits on Iran's uranium enrichment program. It was rapidly producing fuel close to the levels needed for nuclear weapons, and in exchange for new limits on the program, Iran would win relief from economic sanctions. The two sides were nowhere near a final agreement, but signs of a possible compromise had emerged by early June. When Israel attacked Iran, the negotiations collapsed. Yet Iran has signaled that it remains willing to talk, and even a strike on Fordo would not necessarily wipe out prospects of a return to the negotiating table. If the Trump administration follows an attack on Iran with an enticing offer, such as large-scale sanctions relief or peace guarantees, there is still a chance that Iran would consider making concessions, said Vali Nasr, an Iran expert and a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. 'Is there an offer on the table that the Iranian people in this moment can actually rally around?' he said. 'If it's only a stick, then they're going to fight.' So far, Trump has not extended many carrots. He called in a social media post on Tuesday for Iran's 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER.' Iran may lean into nuclear activity All eyes are on Fordo. But it is possible that Iran has secret nuclear sites aimed at producing weapons that the United States and Israel do not know about, though no public evidence has emerged of such places. If they do exist, Iran could use whatever it has left to try to accelerate its nuclear program in the wake an American attack. With the damage Israeli airstrikes have done to nuclear facilities and the killings of top nuclear scientists, Iran probably lacks the capacity to build a nuclear weapon quickly, analysts said. Still, it could move in that direction and would have fresh incentive to do so. 'You would begin to see that broader escalation that they've held back on,' said Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at Chatham House. After all, Iran would have few other options left for deterring future attacks, she added. Iran's Parliament has publicly discussed a withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The treaty, of which Israel is not a signatory, currently requires Iran to submit to oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency and other transparency obligations and to commit to not building a nuclear bomb. So far, the government has reiterated its longstanding insistence that Iran's nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. But Iran has firmly refused to capitulate to a central American demand that it give up uranium enrichment, saying it has the right to a civilian nuclear program. The war could get bigger and messier Over the past week, Iran has avoided striking American troops or other targets that could pull the United States into the war. Its leaders may still be hoping to make a deal with the Trump administration to end the conflict and wary of taking on the US military on top of Israel's. Though Iran has responded to Israeli attacks with missiles and threats of its own, it has refrained from hitting American troops or bases in the Middle East. It has also not struck Arab countries allied with the United States, such as Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates. Nor has it sent global oil prices soaring by sealing off or harassing traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping channel to Iran's south. But at least one Iranian official has warned that Iran could do so if the United States enters the war. And Iran's allied militias in the region, including the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and armed groups in Iraq, have not joined the fight. Many of them have been seriously weakened over the past two years. But those Iranian allies could still join the fray if the Trump administration decides to strike. If the United States tries to force Iran to capitulate, 'Iran will keep hitting until the end of the missile capabilities,' said Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Talk of regime change Trump said on social media this week that the United States is weighing whether to kill Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but had decided 'not for now.' Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said in a Fox News interview this week that changing Iran's regime 'could certainly be the result' of this war. Even if the United States assassinates Khamenei, however, the religious-military establishment that has tightly held power in Iran for nearly five decades may not fall. With a war raging, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the most powerful branch of Iran's military, could seize control of the country, said Nasr, the professor. They might put in place a more Western-friendly government, or, more likely, replace Khamenei with a more extreme figure who would dig in for a long fight, Nasr added. If the military does not assert itself quickly, some analysts fear that Iran could plunge into chaos or civil war as different factions struggle for control. But they see little chance for Iran's liberal opposition, which has been weakened and brutally repressed by the regime, to prevail. Iran's people could rise up again Netanyahu encouraged the Iranian people last week to capitalize on Israel's attacks on their government and 'rise up' against their 'evil and oppressive regime.' Iranians have staged mass protests against clerical rule several times in recent history, most recently with the 'Women, Life, Freedom' demonstrations of late 2022. Each time, the opposition has faced a harsh crackdown by government security forces. Some Iranians so despise the clerical leaders that they have at times looked to Israel as an ally and openly hoped for the United States to install new leadership. Some Iranian opponents of the regime cheered Israel's initial attacks on Iran, which they saw as more evidence of their government's incompetence and mismanagement. But the growing death toll, the attacks on civilian infrastructure and the panic gripping Iranian cities are hardening many in the country against Israel. Iranian social media platforms have been full of patriotic posts in recent days, expressing unity against foreign intervention, if not exactly support for the regime.

News18

34 minutes ago

• News18

The Strait Of Hormuz: Has Iran Ever Closed The World's Most Critical Oil Route?

Last Updated: For decades, Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. As tensions with Israel hit new highs, the question returns: Has it ever done it? And what happens if it does now? For over half a century, the Strait of Hormuz has served as the world's most vital energy corridor. Connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea, this narrow waterway, just 21 nautical miles wide at its tightest point, is the main transit route for oil and gas exports from some of the most energy-rich nations on the planet. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Iran, and the UAE all depend on it to get their crude to global markets. According to data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), nearly 20–21 million barrels of oil pass through the strait every single day, roughly a fifth of the world's daily consumption. It is also a key route for liquefied natural gas (LNG), especially from Qatar. Any disruption here doesn't just rattle West Asia; it shakes energy markets across the globe. And yet, despite decades of political brinkmanship, proxy wars, sanctions, drone attacks and naval showdowns, the Strait of Hormuz has never once been fully shut in modern history. Has The Strait Ever Been Closed? No. But It Has Come Close One of the most persistent myths about West Asia's conflicts is that Iran has previously blocked the Strait of Hormuz. While it is true that Tehran has repeatedly threatened to do so, sometimes in response to sanctions, sometimes as political posturing, it has never followed through. During the Iran–Iraq War in the 1980s, both sides launched attacks on oil tankers in what became known as the 'Tanker War." Iran mined parts of the Gulf and used fast-attack boats to target Kuwaiti and Saudi tankers. Iraq retaliated with missile strikes. The conflict led the United States to intervene, reflagging Kuwaiti tankers and escorting them with US warships under Operation Earnest Will. Several ships were damaged, some sunk, and global oil prices spiked. But crucially, the Strait remained open throughout, battered but not blocked. In 2011 and 2012, Iran once again threatened to close the Strait in response to European and American sanctions targeting its oil exports and banking system. Senior Iranian officials, including then-Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi, warned of a complete shutdown if oil sanctions were enforced. Western powers responded swiftly, dispatching naval forces to the region. The United States, the UK and France conducted high-visibility naval exercises, making it clear that any attempt to blockade Hormuz would provoke military retaliation. Iran, ultimately, did not escalate further. More recently, in 2019, tensions soared after the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal and imposed 'maximum pressure" sanctions on Tehran. Iran was blamed for attacks on tankers near the Strait and was caught seizing a British-flagged oil tanker, the Stena Impero. A US surveillance drone was also shot down by Iranian forces. Once again, fears of closure gripped global markets. Yet even amid these flashpoints, the Strait remained navigable. Why Has It Never Been Fully Shut? Iran's threats to block the Strait have historically served as a geopolitical lever — a way to raise the stakes without firing the first shot. But a full closure has always been a risky gambit, not least because it would come at a huge cost to Iran itself. About 90 per cent of Iran's oil exports also pass through the Strait. Blocking it would strangle its own economy, already crippled by sanctions, and isolate it further. Moreover, the move would likely be interpreted as an act of war, giving the US and its allies legal and political justification for direct military intervention. With the US Navy's 5th Fleet headquartered in Bahrain, any closure attempt would be met with overwhelming naval force. Diplomatic costs aside, Gulf countries such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia have also taken measures to reduce vulnerability by building overland pipelines that bypass Hormuz altogether. Though these pipelines don't eliminate dependence entirely, they offer partial mitigation. As a result, Iran's leadership, while often willing to provoke, threaten, or harass shipping, has historically stopped short of a full blockade. So What Makes The Current Crisis Different? The Israel–Iran conflict in 2025 is distinct not because missiles are flying, they've flown before, but because of the scale, openness, and maritime dimension of the escalation. Three developments make this round far more volatile than previous flare-ups. Israel has publicly acknowledged direct strikes on multiple key Iranian nuclear sites, including Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan, and Arak. These aren't isolated incidents or covert sabotage attempts. They are deliberate, declared military actions against some of the most protected and strategically vital components of Iran's nuclear programme. This is a sharp departure from previous Israeli operations. In earlier years, Israel was widely believed to be behind cyberattacks like Stuxnet (2010), mysterious explosions at Natanz (2020), and the assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (2020), but never formally admitted responsibility. Those were covert, plausibly deniable moves aimed at slowing Iran's nuclear progress without crossing into full-scale war. Record ballistic missile barrages deep into civilian areas While Iran has previously launched missiles, including during escalations in 2024, this round was unprecedented in both scale and intensity. Iranian forces fired hundreds of ballistic missiles, including Sejjil-class and newer variants, toward Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Be'er Sheva. One missile landed on the grounds of Soroka Medical Centre, injuring civilians. The combination of sheer volume, trajectory over densely populated areas, and civilian casualties represents a deliberate escalation meant to pressure the Israeli public. Israel publicly declaring Khamenei a wartime target In a major rhetorical escalation, Israel has shifted from opposing Iran's nuclear ambitions to directly targeting its top leadership. On June 19, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz explicitly declared that ' Khamenei cannot continue to exist," calling him a 'modern Hitler" and blaming him for ordering missile strikes on Israeli civilian infrastructure. Complementing Katz's statement, a Reuters report quoted Israeli officials as saying that the June airstrikes were not just about dismantling Iran's nuclear and missile capabilities, but were also aimed at 'breaking the foundations of Khamenei's rule" and weakening the regime's internal grip on power. This is the first time Israel has publicly identified Ayatollah Khamenei himself as part of its war objectives. Previous conflicts, even at their peak, focused on Iran's weapons programmes or proxy forces. What Happens If The Strait Is Closed, Even Temporarily? Even a temporary disruption to the flow of oil through Hormuz would have serious global repercussions. Energy markets are already jittery. A full blockade could send oil prices soaring past $120–130 per barrel within days. Shipping insurance premiums would spike. LNG supply chains, particularly to Asia, would be severely impacted. Major energy importers like China, Japan, South Korea and India would feel the heat almost immediately. Naval deployments would increase across the board, and the chances of accidental escalation between rival warships or submarines would rise sharply. The US has already repositioned key naval assets in the Gulf, including aircraft carriers and guided missile destroyers. Freight delays, insurance re-pricing, and investor anxiety could together inflict real damage on the global economy. India: Energy Security and Strategic Stakes India imports more than 60 per cent of its crude oil through the Strait of Hormuz, sourcing supplies from key partners such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE. Given this dependency, any prolonged disruption in the strait could affect energy flows and pricing, but Indian officials have sought to project calm amid rising tensions. Speaking to News18, Union Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas Hardeep Singh Puri offered reassurance, stating: 'Even if everything goes wrong, we have enough oil." He explained that out of the 5.5 million barrels of crude oil India imports daily, around 1.5 million barrels come via the Hormuz route. 'The worry will be if the strait is closed or choked," he noted, adding that 'there are many countries that would not want it to be shut." Puri emphasised that while India is monitoring the situation closely, the Strait of Hormuz has not been closed in the last 50 years, even during high-tension phases. 'I would use the word anxiety, not worry," he said. 'There have been many phases of heightened tensions in the region, but energy does not stop flowing." India's Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) provide an additional cushion, covering approximately 9–10 days of national demand. Conclusion: A Strait Always On The Brink top videos View all The Strait of Hormuz is more than just a strategic waterway; it is a geopolitical barometer. Its status reflects the tensions in West Asia, and the current indicators are flashing red. While history shows that Iran has never actually closed the Strait, the dynamics in 2025 are markedly different: open hostilities, regional spillover, and the growing likelihood of US intervention. Whether Iran crosses that final line, and whether the world can afford the consequences, remains to be seen. About the Author Karishma Jain Karishma Jain, Chief Sub Editor at writes and edits opinion pieces on a variety of subjects, including Indian politics and policy, culture and the arts, technology and social change. Follow her @ More Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : Israel-Iran tensions Strait of Hormuz Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 20, 2025, 12:22 IST News explainers The Strait Of Hormuz: Has Iran Ever Closed The World's Most Critical Oil Route?

Time of India

38 minutes ago

• Time of India

Erdogan vows to boost Turkiye's missile production as Israel-Iran war escalates

Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel As the war between Israel and Iran escalates, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said he plans to strengthen the country's deterrence capabilities so that no country would dare attack announced plans this week to step up Turkiye's production of medium- and long-range discussed the Iran-Israel war with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in a telephone call on Friday. He told Merz that the Iranian nuclear issue can only be resolved through negotiations, according to Erdogan's Turkiye's tense relations with Israel, analysts and officials don't see an immediate threat of the conflict spreading into NATO-member Turkiye. Still, some see the move by Erdogan as a sign that the Israel-Iran war could trigger a new arms race in the region, with countries not directly involved in the fray ramping up their military efforts to preempt future Kasim Han, a professor of international relations at Istanbul's Beykoz University, said that Turkiye was reacting to what he described as an unravelling world order."The Turkish government is drifting toward what is the name of the game in the Middle East right now: an escalation of an arms race," he and the US have set a high standard in aerial warfare, creating a technological gap that Turkiye and others are eager to close, Han said following a Cabinet meeting on Monday that "we are making production plans to bring our medium- and long-range missile stockpiles to a level that ensures deterrence, in light of recent developments.""God willing, in the not-too-distant future, we will reach a defense capacity that is so strong that no one will even dare to act tough toward us," Erdogan an separate address days later, the Turkish leader highlighted Turkey's progress in its domestically developed defence industry, that includes drones, fighter jets, armored vehicles and navy vessels, but stressed that continued effort was needed to ensure full deterrence."Although Turkiye has a very large army - the second largest in NATO - its air power, its air defense is relatively weaker," said Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, a Turkey analyst at the German Marshall Fund think ongoing conflict has reinforced the importance of air superiority, including missiles and missile defense systems, prompting "countries in the region, including Turkiye to strengthen its air power," he the start of the conflict, Erdogan has been scrambling to end the hostilities. He has held a flurry of phone calls with leaders, including US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, offering to act as a "facilitator" for the resumption of negotiations on Iran's nuclear are deep concerns in Turkey that a prolonged conflict will cause energy disruptions and lead to refugee movement from Iran, with which it shares a 560 kilometer-long (348 mile) relies heavily on energy imports, including from Iran, and rising oil prices due to the conflict could aggravate inflation and further strain its troubled has strongly criticised Israel's actions, saying Iran has the legitimate right to defend itself against Israel's attacks, which came as nuclear negotiations were close allies, Turkey and Israel have grown deeply estranged, especially after the start of the war in Gaza in 2023, with Erdogan becoming one of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's fiercest further deteriorated following the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad's government, as Israel grew increasingly wary of expanding Turkish influence in this year, Turkiye and Israel however, established a "de-escalation mechanism" aimed at preventing conflict between their troops in Syria. The move came after Syria's Foreign Ministry said that Israeli jets had struck a Syrian air base that Turkey reportedly hoped to hasn't commented on Turkey's announcement that it plans to ramp up missile production, but Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar responded to Erdogan's criticisms of Israel over its attack on Iran in an X post on Wednesday. He accused Erdogan of having "imperialist ambitions" and of having "set a record in suppressing the freedoms and rights of his citizens, as well as his country's opposition."Erdogan's nationalist ally, Devlet Bahceli, suggested that Turkey was a potential target for Israel, accusing the country of strategically "encircling" Turkey with its military actions. He didn't say, however, that such statements were for "domestic consumption" to garner support amid growing anti-Israel sentiment in Turkey."I don't think that Israel has any interest in attacking Turkiye, or Turkiye has any interest in a conflict with Israel," Han said.