A “crypto hall of shame” is an informal, curated list of cryptocurrency scams, hacks, and failures. It is not an official legal or regulatory register, and the events grouped under the label can be very different: fraud allegations, confirmed thefts, software exploits, operational failures, or user losses.
What the phrase means—and what it does not
The phrase describes an editorial collection of notable crypto-related scandals or failures. For example, a GitHub collection uses “Crypto Hall of Shame” for a dated list of events, while a 2019 consultation response hosted by Australia’s Treasury refers to a crowd-maintained “Crypto/ICO Hall of Shame” when discussing scam methods. Neither source establishes an official taxonomy or register.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Because the label is informal, inclusion does not by itself prove that a person or company committed a crime. A list is also selective: it should not be treated as a complete record of every crypto incident or as evidence that every entry is equally serious or culpable.
What may appear on a crypto hall of shame
- Fraud and scams: schemes involving misleading claims, ICOs, impersonation, or alleged exchange fraud. Allegations should be distinguished from findings established by a court or regulator.
- Theft and security breaches: attacks affecting exchanges, wallets, or decentralized-finance services.
- Protocol and infrastructure failures: smart-contract bugs, bridge exploits, or attacks on a blockchain network.
- Operational or user losses: funds sent to the wrong destination or made inaccessible after a key is lost.
- Other crypto-related mishaps: these belong only when they are material and documented, and should not be casually labeled criminal conduct.
These categories are not interchangeable. A scam involves deception; a hack or exploit may involve unauthorized access or a vulnerability; a user mistake or technical failure can cause a loss without establishing fraud.
#1 Best Overall
Examples—and how to read their reported values
An archived GitHub collection lists Wormhole, Qubit Finance, and Poly Network incidents with values attached. The figures below are those printed by the collection, not a consistently measured or independently verified dataset:
| Incident | Date shown in the collection | Value printed in the collection |
|---|---|---|
| Wormhole bridge hack | February 2, 2022 | $320 million |
| Qubit Finance exploit | January 28, 2022 | About $80 million |
| Poly Network theft | August 11, 2021 | $600 million |
The collection’s entries mix currencies and kinds of value. A figure may represent a reported or estimated amount rather than a comparable measure of final loss. Do not add these figures into a meaningful total or use them to rank incidents without checking the original reporting and establishing a common measurement.
Scam examples in a 2019 consultation response
In a response dated February 20, 2019, Dr. Rex Yeap wrote that crypto-related scammers included “the imposters, fake YouTube influencers, among others.” Yeap also named Denaro, Bitconnect, and Centra as examples of high-profile ICO exit scams. The response is hosted by Australia’s Treasury, but it is Yeap’s submission—not a Treasury enforcement finding or adjudication of those examples.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
How to assess an entry responsibly
A useful entry gives readers enough context to distinguish what happened from what is alleged. Look for:
- the date and the person, organization, protocol, or system involved;
- a clear account of the event and a source supporting it;
- whether the claim is alleged, reported, or established by a legal or regulatory finding;
- what a quoted dollar value measures, and whether it is an estimate, reported loss, or another valuation;
- any documented effect on users, recovery, or legal outcome.
The GitHub collection is archived and read-only, with GitHub showing an archive date of November 9, 2022. It is an example of the format, not a current incident tracker. Its entries should not be presented as a complete or up-to-date catalogue.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Sources
- Archived GitHub “Crypto Hall of Shame” collection (the cited collection is archived; the supplied source material does not provide a more specific URL).
- Dr. Rex Yeap, response to Australia’s Initial Coin Offerings consultation, February 20, 2019 (the supplied source material does not provide a more specific URL).
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
