Binance says 90% of stolen assets replenished, targets Sunday withdrawals

The hack removed assets worth $6.3 billion from Binance, making it the largest cryptocurrency hack on record, according to the article. Replenishing 90% means Binance has obtained replacement assets equal to most of the stolen balances. It does not mean the original coins were returned.

Binance is buying replacement tokens through market purchases and over-the-counter trades. It is funding the effort with its corporate treasury, part of its Secure Asset Fund for Users, and some of its futures insurance fund. Binance says customers, rather than users, will not absorb the financial loss.

The exchange says Bitcoin, Ether and eight other assets are fully backed. Less-liquid tokens remain short, and Binance continues buying them. Withdrawals were still targeted for Sunday, while a full zero-knowledge proof was being generated. Binance had not disclosed the exact contributions from each fund or the amount of crypto recovered.

Recovery and replenishment are different outcomes. Recovery means the original stolen coins are found, frozen, or returned. Replenishment means the exchange obtains other coins of the same assets or value to replace what disappeared. The distinction matters because customer claims can be covered even if the original wallet movements cannot be reversed.

Binance says it is using its corporate treasury, part of SAFU, and a portion of its futures insurance fund. It is also buying replacement assets through market and over-the-counter transactions. Industry partners froze about $3 billion in affected assets, but those frozen funds are separate from Binance’s replacement effort.

The exchange says balances in Bitcoin, Ether and eight other assets were fully backed. It did not quantify how much stolen crypto was recovered. Its new reserves snapshot offers an update, while the full cryptographic proof was still being generated. Thus, replenishment describes financial restoration, not confirmed retrieval.

Binance described the theft as a $6.3 billion loss and said Saturday that 90% of the stolen assets had been replenished. On that headline figure, 90% represents approximately $5.67 billion. The remaining 10% would be approximately $630 million. These are calculations from the reported percentage, not a separately disclosed replacement total.

The article gives another important figure. Binance said Friday it had set aside $6.34 billion to cover losses, including $5 billion in affected cryptocurrencies. That reserve allocation is not identical to the amount already replaced. Binance also said the remaining shortfall consisted of less-liquid tokens.

The exact gap remained less certain than the percentage suggests. The spokesperson did not quantify recovered crypto, and Binance did not disclose how much each funding source contributed. CertiK also said it needed more information to verify the claimed $5 billion in replacement cryptocurrencies. A full zero-knowledge proof was still being generated.

A failure to fully replace stolen assets would leave some customer balances insufficiently backed. If withdrawals also remain closed, customers could be unable to access or move their funds for longer. That would intensify scrutiny of Binance’s finances and its claim that the company, not users, will absorb the loss.

The article identifies the remaining problem as less-liquid tokens. Binance says it is buying those assets through market and over-the-counter trades, while using its treasury, SAFU and futures insurance fund. It also says Bitcoin, Ether and eight other assets were fully backed. The full cryptographic proof was not yet complete.

The source does not state that a market crash or customer losses would occur. It does establish that the hack was the largest cryptocurrency hack on record and that partners froze about $3 billion in affected assets. If replacement or withdrawals were delayed, those facts would likely keep attention focused on Binance’s reserves, but the article gives no forecast.

Binance says three internal sources are supporting its replacement effort. They are the corporate treasury, a partial deployment of the Secure Asset Fund for Users, and a portion of the futures insurance fund. Binance says the insurance fund will remain above required risk-management levels, but it did not disclose the minimum balance or each source’s contribution.

The article separately describes actions by Tether and Circle. After the hack, those industry partners froze about $3 billion in affected assets. Freezing prevents movement of particular assets. It is not the same as Binance purchasing replacement tokens or allocating funds to restore its reserves.

That separation matters when measuring Binance’s response. The frozen assets may be connected to the stolen assets, but they do not count as Binance’s replacement of stolen tokens. Binance said it would absorb the financial impact rather than pass it to users. It also published a reserves snapshot, while its full zero-knowledge proof was still being generated.

Liquidity describes how easily an asset can be bought or sold without sharply changing its price. Less-liquid tokens generally have thinner trading activity and fewer available orders. Replacing a large stolen balance can therefore take longer and may require accepting less favorable prices. The article identifies these tokens as the remaining shortfall.

Binance says it is purchasing them through both market and over-the-counter transactions. A market trade uses available exchange liquidity. An over-the-counter trade is arranged directly between parties. Using both routes gives Binance more ways to locate the required tokens, but the article does not state the prices, volumes, or completion timetable.

Bitcoin and Ether were among the assets Binance said were fully backed, alongside eight other assets. That does not prove every token is equally easy to replace; it only describes Binance’s reported reserve position. The exchange still needed to buy less-liquid tokens and generate its full zero-knowledge proof. The spokesperson did not quantify the remaining shortfall.

Customers usually see balances recorded in an exchange’s internal system, while the exchange holds cryptocurrency reserves in wallets or other accounts. The key question is whether those reserves cover customer claims. The article says Binance’s Bitcoin, Ether and eight other asset balances were fully backed, meaning its reported reserves were sufficient for those balances.

A reserves snapshot is a point-in-time report of assets held. It can show quantities associated with reserves, but it does not by itself prove every customer liability or prevent later changes. A zero-knowledge proof is a cryptographic method that can demonstrate a statement is true without exposing all underlying data. Exchanges can use such proofs to connect liabilities and reserves while limiting disclosure.

The article says Binance published a new reserves snapshot, but its full cryptographic proof was still being generated. Binance estimated that proof would take 40 to 50 hours. CertiK said it needed more information to verify the claimed $5 billion in replacement cryptocurrencies.