Blockchain security firm BlockSec has reported that $387.5 million was stolen from crypto exchange Bitget, while less than $1 million of the stolen funds has been frozen, according to the firm's public disclosures. If confirmed, the figures would rank among the largest reported exchange security incidents in recent memory, though key details — including the attack method, the affected assets, and the responsible party — have not been established in BlockSec's report.

The Reported $387.5 Million Theft Figure

BlockSec, a blockchain security and smart contract auditing firm, attributed the $387.5 million theft total to an incident involving Bitget. The figure comes from BlockSec's own monitoring and analysis, and it had not been independently verified by a separate authoritative source at the time of writing. That caveat is routine for incidents of this scale: initial loss figures from on-chain monitoring firms are typically refined as tracing progresses and as affected platforms make official disclosures.

Bitget had already signaled operational disruption ahead of the report. The exchange announced a phased restart of withdrawals, with Bitcoin withdrawals reopened and Ethereum withdrawals scheduled — a service disruption consistent with the scale of losses BlockSec has described. Withdrawal availability is typically the most immediate user-facing concern during an exchange security incident, since it determines whether customers can move their funds off the platform.

The $387.5 million figure should be treated as BlockSec's reported estimate rather than a confirmed total. The research brief does not establish which assets were affected, how the funds were moved, or what on-chain evidence underpins the number. Readers should watch for official statements from Bitget, or corroborating analysis from additional security firms, before treating the total as settled.

Less Than $1 Million Has Been Frozen

Against the reported $387.5 million stolen, BlockSec indicated that less than $1 million has been frozen. The gap between the two figures is stark: the frozen amount represents a fraction of one percent of the reported theft, suggesting that the majority of the funds remain outside the reach of exchanges, law enforcement, and other freezing mechanisms at this stage.

Frozen funds in crypto incidents are typically immobilized through cooperation with exchanges that receive the stolen assets, or through stablecoin issuers capable of blacklisting addresses. The limited freezing so far does not rule out future recovery actions, but it does reflect how quickly stolen cryptocurrency can be dispersed across wallets and chains. BlockSec has not, based on available information, specified where the frozen funds are held or which party executed the freeze. One marker to watch in subsequent disclosures is whether the frozen total rises, since freezes frequently occur in stages as exchanges and issuers identify incoming stolen assets.

It is worth noting that frozen funds are distinct from recovered funds. Freezing immobilizes assets at a specific address or issuer level; recovery requires a further legal or technical process to return the funds to their rightful owners. The current figure of less than $1 million should therefore not be characterized as a recovery total.

What the Reported Figures — and Do Not — Confirm

BlockSec's report, as captured in the available evidence, establishes two specific data points: a theft figure of $387.5 million and a frozen amount below $1 million. The research brief does not provide the theft mechanism, a breakdown of stolen assets by token or chain, destination wallet addresses, transaction hashes, or a timeline of the incident.

Without on-chain data pointing to specific transactions, the $387.5 million figure cannot be independently verified through a block explorer. Reporting on the incident from other outlets, along with any official Bitget communications, may provide the additional layer of confirmation that the current evidence does not supply. Confirmed incidents at centralized exchanges have historically intensified industry-wide scrutiny of custody arrangements, reserve disclosures, and withdrawal operations, which is one reason the verification process here carries weight beyond the immediate figures. The broader market context for major assets remains a separate question from the exchange-level incident itself.

This article will be updated as verified information becomes available. The core facts at this stage are BlockSec's two reported figures and the significant disparity between them, with all further incident detail pending confirmation.

Additional source references: source document 1, source document 2.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency and digital asset markets carry significant risk. Always do your own research before making decisions.