
Judge freezes wallets tied to the Feb. 2025 Bybit hack; lawsuit against North Korea's Lazarus Group seeks recovery of $1.5B while the case unfolds.
A federal judge in Washington granted Bybit a preliminary injunction freezing crypto wallets tied to the February 2025 hack that drained about $1.5 billion in Ethereum. The order, issued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, blocks transfers of the remaining stolen assets while the exchange's civil case against North Korea proceeds.
Bybit filed the lawsuit on Aug. 7, 2026, naming the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Lazarus Group as defendants. The suit asks the court to order the return of the stolen Ethereum. The complaint also names the Reconnaissance General Bureau, North Korea's intelligence arm. The hack took place Feb. 21, 2025, after attackers exploited a vulnerability in Safe{Wallet}, the multisig service Bybit used to hold the funds. The theft ranks as the largest from a crypto exchange on record.
Within days, the FBI attributed the attack to North Korean state-sponsored actors and linked it to a broader pattern of North Korean cyber operations. Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis has put North Korean state hackers' cumulative crypto thefts at $6.75 billion across multiple campaigns.
Bybit CEO Ben Zhou described the injunction as one piece of a wider recovery effort. The exchange has been coordinating with other platforms and offering financial incentives for the return of stolen funds. The court order, Zhou said, gives the exchange and its partners legal authority to lock wallets and block transactions, and to coordinate with law enforcement across jurisdictions.
The injunction is a holding action, not a final ruling. The judge has not decided whether North Korea or the Lazarus Group is liable, and the freeze stays in place until the case resolves. In practical terms, the order gives exchanges that cooperate with Bybit a reason to freeze any transaction that moves funds from the named wallets, without waiting for a separate court order in their own jurisdiction.
The order also shifts the burden for exchanges that handle Ethereum. A platform that sees a transfer from one of the named wallets now has a clear reason to pause it: the assets are covered by a U.S. court order. Before the injunction, freezing a customer's crypto without a court order carried its own legal risk. Each exchange that screens deposits against the court's wallet list makes recovery easier. The remaining risk sits in wallets the injunction does not yet cover; that part of the stolen Ethereum can still move.
The hard part is that a U.S. court order does not automatically bind an exchange in Singapore or Hong Kong. The freeze has to be enforced through the same cooperation channels Bybit is already using. Bybit paired the lawsuit with coordination with other platforms to shrink the number of places where the stolen Ethereum can be moved or cashed out.
The attackers never breached Bybit's own systems directly. They compromised Safe{Wallet}, the software layer the exchange relied on. Multisig providers sit between an exchange and its assets, and a single vulnerability in that layer can drain billions.
Meanwhile, CLARITY Act passage odds have sunk to 27% after Senate delays, according to AlphaScala's crypto market analysis.
Bybit's 10% bounty for recovered funds remains open, crowdsourcing the tracking work to blockchain sleuths and white-hat hackers.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.