Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Analysts Explain Why BTC Just Crashed to $65K and Where the Bottom Lies

Published

on

Analysts Explain Why BTC Just Crashed to $65K and Where the Bottom Lies


Meanwhile, XRP continues to be the poorest performing altcoin today.

Bitcoin has officially wiped out all gains registered after the reelection of Donald Trump to step back in the White House at the end of 2024. The cryptocurrency plummeted to just over $65,000 minutes ago, which actually puts it in a minor loss since the presidential elections.

Moreover, this means that it has lost almost $25,000 since last Wednesday. It has also shed nearly 50% of its value since the all-time high marked in early October 2025.

Advertisement

Naturally, investors tend to ask themselves what the most probable reason is behind this crash. As with all previous declines from the past several weeks, it doesn’t seem to be aligned with problematic fundamentals within the BTC ecosystem as a whole.

Analysts from the Kobeissi Letter indicated that the actual reason behind the consecutive price dumps is “emotional” selling. Riskier assets, such as BTC, tend to move frequently due to investor sentiment, and the current bearish trend appears to be driven by a mass exodus without any fundamental basis.

Doctor Profit, an analyst known for their rather bearish calls who has been predicting a substantial crash for months, noted that they have placed “big buy” orders at around $57,000-$60,000, which could be the current trend’s bottom.

The analyst added that they plan to hold for 2-3 months, and they are not interested in buying higher than that.

You may also like:

“I consider $57k-$60k as a great entry to make money for the short term and gain some serious % before we continue going down.”

On the other hand, MMCrypto said he believes BTC is indeed in a bear market, but it’s almost over time-wise.

Elsewhere, the altcoins are getting obliterated as well, and XRP is the poorest performer for some reason. The token has plummeted by almost 20% in just 24 hours and now struggles below $1.25.

Advertisement
SPECIAL OFFER (Exclusive)

SECRET PARTNERSHIP BONUS for CryptoPotato readers: Use this link to register and unlock $1,500 in exclusive BingX Exchange rewards (limited time offer).

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Friday’s eth.limo Hijack Caused by Social Engineering on EasyDNS

Published

on

Friday’s eth.limo Hijack Caused by Social Engineering on EasyDNS

Ethereum Name Service gateway eth.limo has revealed that the domain hijacking on Friday was caused by a social engineering attack directed against EasyDNS, its domain name service provider. 

According to a postmortem published by eth.limo on Saturday, an attacker impersonated one of its team members to initiate an account recovery process with easyDNS, granting access to the eth.limo account and allowing them to alter domain settings.

“The NS records were changed and directed to Cloudflare… Once we understood that a DNS hijack had taken place, we immediately notified the community as well as Vitalik Buterin and others. We then began contacting EasyDNS in an attempt to respond to the incident,” the company said.

Eth.limo serves as a Web2 bridge, providing access to around 2 million decentralized websites using the .eth domain name. Hijacking the service could allow an attacker to redirect users to malicious websites. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin warned users Friday to avoid his blog until the incident was resolved.

Advertisement

Mark Jeftovic, CEO of easyDNS, has publicly accepted responsibility for the incident in its own postmortem report. 

“We screwed up and we own it,” said Jeftovic on Saturday. 

“This would mark the first successful social engineering attack against an easyDNS client in our 28-year history. There have been countless attempts.”  

Both companies have pointed to the Domain Name System Security Extension (DNSSEC) in thwarting the hacker’s attempts to do further damage. 

The attacker couldn’t produce valid cryptographic signatures, so Domain Name System resolvers rejected the attacker’s forged DNS responses, causing users to see error messages instead of being redirected to malicious sites. 

Advertisement

“DNSSEC was enabled for their domain when the attackers attempted to flip their nameservers, presumably to effect some manner of phishing or malware injection attack, DNSSEC-aware resolvers, which most are these days, began dropping queries,” Jeftovic said. 

Source: eth.limo

In its postmortem, eth.limo noted that because the attacker lacked the signing keys, they were unable to bypass the safeguards, which likely “reduced the blast radius of the hijack. We are not aware of any user impact at this time. We will provide updates if that changes.”

easyDNS makes changes since the attack

Jeftovic described the social engineering attack as “highly sophisticated,” and said easyDNS is still conducting a post-mortem on how the breach occurred, and has already begun rolling out changes to prevent a recurrence.

Source: easyDNS

“In eth.limo’s case, we will be migrating them to Domainsure, which has a security posture more suited toward enterprise and high-value fintech domains, TLDR there is no mechanism for an account recovery on Domainsure, it’s not a thing,” he added.

“On behalf of everyone here, I apologize to the eth.limo team and the wider Ethereum community. ENS has always had a special place in our heart as the first registrar to enable ENS linking to web2 domains and we’ve been involved in the space since 2017.”

Related: RaveDAO denies manipulation as Binance, Bitget probe RAVE trading activity

Advertisement

The eth.limo incident is the latest in a series of domain hijackings targeting crypto projects. Days earlier, decentralized exchange aggregator CoW Swap lost control of its website after an unknown party hijacked its domain. 

Steakhouse Financial, a DeFi advisory and research firm, similarly disclosed at the end of March that it had lost control of its domain to an attacker.

Magazine: Will the CLARITY Act be good — or bad — for DeFi?