Bitcoin has fallen below $77,000 during an October 30 sell-off following Binance’s estimated $6.3 billion security breach, with analysts watching support around $76,000 and the conditions for
Bitcoin has fallen below $77,000 during an October 30 sell-off following Binance’s estimated $6.3 billion security breach, with analysts watching support around $76,000 and the conditions for a recovery above $80,000.
SummaryBinance market data placed Bitcoin at $76,944 shortly after midnight UTC before it recovered toward $78,000 later in the session. Beyond the initial selling, experts speaking to crypto.news highlighted the potential pressure from customer withdrawals and reduced lending or market-making activity.
In an update reported by Reuters, Binance said it had set aside more than $6.34 billion in company funds to cover losses, including $5 billion held in affected token assets. Partners had frozen approximately $3 billion, separately from those reserves.
In an October 30 post, Token Talk placed Bitcoin near $78,300, above a support zone between $76,200 and $76,800. The analyst described weeks of lower highs inside a descending channel, with buyers repeatedly entering near its lower trendline.
Reclaiming $80,000 and breaking the channel’s upper boundary could bring $84,000–$86,500 back into consideration, according to the post.
Rekt Fencer took a more bullish position, declaring that Bitcoin’s bottom was in. His weekly chart highlighted the FTX collapse, the 2025 Bybit hack and the Binance incident.
You might also like: Bitcoin treasuries hold 1.3M BTC as Bitfinex flags funding risk
Lacie Zhang, research lead at Bitget Wallet, told crypto.news that holding $76,000–$77,000 and recovering $80,000 through sustained spot demand would signal stabilization.
“A systemic crisis isn’t our base case yet,” she said, identifying prolonged withdrawal restrictions and reserve concerns as risks that could prompt lenders and market makers to retreat. Stablecoin depegging or deteriorating market depth would signal contagion, she added.
Blockaid’s initial analysis traced at least $3.5 billion leaving Binance hot wallets on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism and Avalanche in under an hour.
“The attacker effectively reprogrammed a major Binance Ethereum hot wallet so that a single operator could drain it, including any new money deposited into it, and they used that access again more than an hour later,” Ido Ben-Natan, Blockaid’s co-founder and CEO, told crypto.news.
His team identified preparations involving Tornado Cash funding and rehearsals on test wallets hours before the theft.
Although initial investigations pointed to a compromised DevOps engineer’s laptop, Binance subsequently reported additional points of breach, according to AFP, describing the incident as a complex attack.
Stefan Deiss, CEO of enterprise technology company The Hashgraph Group, told crypto.news that trusted identities need controls around what they can authorize. Discussing financial AI agents, he called for verified identities, accountable human operators, spending limits and an off switch.
Nansen’s analysis, shared with crypto.news, traced 18,270 BTC worth approximately $1.48 billion through a central address and into 19 wallets. The funds had not moved again when its analysis was prepared.
The attacker deposited approximately $60 million in USDT into Aave and borrowed $43.5 million worth of ETH against it, according to the firm.
Across exploiter-linked wallets, Nansen identified 442,000 ETH, including two addresses holding 197,500 ETH and 137,600 ETH. Another wallet transferred 14,000 ETH.
Its investigation followed $414 million in assets, including WBETH, ENA, RLUSD, UNI, PEPE and LINK, through 11 wallets that subsequently swapped tokens on decentralized exchanges.
Circle had frozen $823 million in USDC. Separately, Nansen tracked 233.46 million XRP, valued at approximately $297 million, to a single wallet where the funds remained at the time of its analysis.
Varun Datta, founder and CEO of Truth Ventures, told crypto.news that having funds available to replace stolen assets does not resolve every obstacle to reopening withdrawals.
“If an exchange is still checking whether an attacker can access its wallets, customers may have to wait even when there is enough money to repay them,” Datta said.
He highlighted potential mismatches between emergency reserves and customer liabilities. In his example, $1 billion held in Bitcoin against $1 billion owed in stablecoins would leave a $100 million shortfall following a 10% Bitcoin decline.
Andrew Lazutkin, CTO of self-custody provider Tangem, told crypto.news that the central distinction between custodial and self-custodial storage is how risk is distributed.
“In the custodial model, user assets are concentrated within infrastructure controlled by a single organization. A successful attack can therefore affect thousands of users at once,” said Lazutkin.
With self-custody, individuals retain direct control of their private keys, Lazutkin explained. “When funds are properly secured in an offline wallet, an exchange breach alone does not give attackers access to them,” he told crypto.news. Distributing assets across individual wallets reduces their concentration under a single custodian, he added.
Chris Dimitriadis, chief global strategy officer at ISACA, warned that attackers could exploit the incident to trick users into taking actions that compromise their assets. He told crypto.news that boards should treat cyber risk as a standing priority, invest in relevant skills, and ensure employees can recognize targeted attacks.
Read more: Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP crash as crypto liquidations top $1.5B
