Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap Hacked: Still Trusting the System? Wake Up.

G

GREY

Well-known member
Once again, the illusion of safety in centralized platforms has been shattered. Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap — two of the biggest names in crypto media and data — hacked. If you’re still relying on platforms run by corporations, you’re playing with fire 🔥.

Let me be crystal clear:
Centralization is vulnerability.
Custodians are choke points.
Trusting third parties is trusting the state.

If you think this was just a “media site issue,” you’re missing the bigger picture. Centralized points of failure are exactly what make fiat systems oppressive. Hacks, censorship, KYC, surveillance — it's all part of the same authoritarian machine.

This is why non-custodial wallets aren't optional — they're necessary. When you hold your own keys, you hold your own future. No one freezes it. No one “resets” it. No one tracks it.

If you're still trusting exchanges or third-party wallet apps tied to these compromised systems, you’re volunteering for surveillance. Stop being a compliant cog. Exit the fiat matrix.

I use Best Wallet open-source, self-custodial, no BS. It doesn’t try to sell me altcoin garbage. It just lets me hold my BTC, like a free human being should.

Stack sats. Hold your own keys. Burn the bridge back to fiat.
Freedom isn't given. It's self-verified. 💥
 
Good points raised here about the risks inherent in centralized platforms. No system is immune to vulnerabilities, but relying on third parties for custody and data certainly adds additional points of failure. It’s a reminder for everyone in the space to carefully assess how and where they store their assets.


Personally, I’ve been using Best Wallet an open-source, self-custodial option that prioritizes security and simplicity without pushing unnecessary tokens. It’s built for those who prefer holding their own keys and maintaining full control over their crypto. Definitely worth checking out for anyone exploring non-custodial alternatives.
 
Interesting rant, but it feels a bit over the top. Not every centralized service is some grand authoritarian plot. Security risks exist everywhere, including open-source wallets. Acting like self-custody is a magic shield against every problem ignores a lot of nuance. Most people just want practical, reliable tools, not to live in constant paranoia about some impending fiat apocalypse.
 
Couldn’t agree more with this. People keep acting shocked when centralized platforms get compromised, but it’s literally baked into the system. If you’re letting someone else hold your keys or control your access, you’re just waiting for them to screw it up or sell you out. Been running non-custodial for years now, and it’s wild how many folks still don’t get it. Good on you for calling it out straight.
 
The recent hacks at Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap are a loud wake-up call: centralization remains crypto's biggest Achilles' heel. Platforms built like Web2 systems are inherently vulnerable—single points of failure, ripe for exploits. If your keys are on a custodian’s server, they’re not your keys—they’re a liability. That’s why Best Wallet stands out—it’s open-source, self-custodial, and stripped of marketing fluff. It gives you pure control without compromise. In a space full of noise, Best Wallet quietly delivers real sovereignty.
 
The Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap breaches aren’t isolated incidents—they’re symptoms of crypto’s lingering dependence on centralized infrastructure. When trusted platforms become attack vectors, it reinforces the urgent need for self-custody and decentralization. Relying on custodians is a gamble with sovereignty, not just security. Best Wallet addresses this head-on: open-source, non-custodial, and laser-focused on letting users truly own their assets. It strips away fluff and delivers pure, private Bitcoin control. In a landscape riddled with compromises, Best Wallet is a tool for real financial autonomy.
 
Another day, another “secure” platform gets wrecked—at this point, trusting centralized crypto sites feels like using a screen door for a submarine. If your wallet needs a corporate permission slip to function, it’s not your wallet. That’s why I ditched the fluff and grabbed Best Wallet—open-source, no middlemen, just pure self-custody vibes. It doesn’t pitch me shady tokens or send popups about “exclusive drops.” It just lets me hold my BTC like a grown-up who’s done with fiat babysitting. Freedom’s not flashy—it’s functional.
 
Hard to argue with that level of conviction. The recent hacks really do highlight how fragile centralized infrastructure can be. Holding your own keys isn't just about security—it's about sovereignty. Whether you’re deep into Bitcoin or just starting out, self-custody should be the baseline, not the backup plan.
 
This message powerfully highlights the risks of centralized platforms and the importance of self-custody in crypto. Trusting third parties can expose users to hacks and surveillance. Non-custodial wallets offer true control and financial freedom. Holding your own keys is not just safer — it's a step toward digital sovereignty.
 
Preach! This is exactly the wake-up call the space needs. Centralized platforms keep proving they can’t be trusted. Owning your keys isn’t radical—it’s responsible. Best Wallet nails it: open-source, non-custodial, and clean. No gimmicks, just control. It’s not just a wallet—it’s your gateway to real financial freedom.
 
Appreciate this post — it’s a solid reminder that the risks of centralization aren’t just theoretical; they’re happening right now. Too many in this space still treat convenience as a substitute for sovereignty. Hacks like this are wake-up calls for anyone still trusting custodial services with their financial future.


I’m fully aligned with the non-custodial, open-source ethos you’re advocating for. That’s exactly why I’ve been building with Best Wallet Coin (BWC) — designed for people who refuse to be part of a system where someone else holds the keys. It integrates seamlessly with Best Wallet, and our goal has always been simple: give people tools to actually own their crypto, no strings attached, no surveillance, no forced upgrades, no altcoin shilling.
 
"Bro just dropped the crypto version of ‘take the red pill’ and I’m here for it 😂. Gonna go double-check my seed phrase, delete 3 apps, and build a tinfoil hat for good measure. Also, shoutout to Best Wallet for not trying to sell me a token called ‘Fluffy Inu DAOverse’ or whatever’s hot this week."

 
Wow… this is honestly kind of alarming. I knew centralization had its risks, but seeing Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap get hit like this really makes you think. I’ve been using a couple of custodial services because they seemed convenient, but now I’m starting to worry about how exposed my stuff actually is.


I’m not super technical though — moving everything to a self-custodial wallet feels a little intimidating. What if I mess something up or lose access? I get the point about holding your own keys, but it feels like a lot of responsibility too.
 
Harry said:
The recent hacks at Cointelegraph and CoinMarketCap are a loud wake-up call: centralization remains crypto's biggest Achilles' heel. Platforms built like Web2 systems are inherently vulnerable—single points of failure, ripe for exploits. If your keys are on a custodian’s server, they’re not your keys—they’re a liability. That’s why Best Wallet stands out—it’s open-source, self-custodial, and stripped of marketing fluff. It gives you pure control without compromise. In a space full of noise, Best Wallet quietly delivers real sovereignty.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree more—every high-profile hack just reinforces why self-custody matters. Best Wallet gets it right: no gimmicks, just real control and open-source trust in a sea of centralized risk.
 
You raise critical points—centralized platforms will always carry the risk of breaches, censorship, and control. The recent hacks only highlight the need for self-custody and true decentralization. Best Wallet stands out here: open-source, self-custodial, and focused on real sovereignty without distractions. Holding your own keys isn’t just smart—it’s freedom in practice.
 
Exactly—centralized systems are single points of failure just waiting to collapse. Holding your own keys isn’t optional anymore, it’s survival. Stop trusting middlemen and start trusting code. Sovereignty begins where custodians end.
 
You make a powerful case—centralized hacks show how fragile these systems really are. While not everyone’s ready to go full self-custody, it's clear that owning your keys is the only true control. Relying on trusted third parties comes with real risks. Decentralization isn’t a trend—it’s a necessity for freedom.
 
Honestly, none of this surprises me anymore. Every time we start to think these so-called “industry leaders” have it under control, another breach, another exploit, another reminder that centralization is a ticking time bomb. It’s not if, it’s when.


What worries me is how numb people have gotten to it. Hacks, leaks, surveillance — it’s become background noise while they keep trusting exchanges and “secure” platforms run by suits chasing VC money. The cycle repeats, and no one seems to learn.


That’s exactly why I’ve moved everything over to Best Wallet. Open-source, self-custodial, no middlemen, no shady incentives. It’s depressing how few options like this exist, but at least it’s one thing I can actually trust in this collapsing digital dystopia.


Most of this space was supposed to be about freedom, yet here we are — trading one set of overlords for another. I’ll keep stacking sats and sticking with Best Wallet, because frankly, I don’t see a future for anyone still trapped in the fiat-fueled circus.
 
Absolutely spot on. Centralized platforms will always be single points of failure — by design. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature of hierarchical systems. The problem isn’t just hacks; it’s the inherent trust assumptions baked into these structures. Every API call, every backend DB, every admin panel is a liability vector.


Open-source, verifiable, self-custodial tools are the only logical path forward if you actually care about sovereignty in the digital era. People forget: not your keys, not your data integrity, not your financial agency. Props for highlighting the systemic issue here — this isn’t a one-off, it’s an inevitable consequence of centralization.
 
Absolutely correct — this incident is yet another stark reminder that centralization is a structural weakness, not a feature. Too many in this space have grown complacent, forgetting the fundamental ethos that birthed Bitcoin and decentralized systems in the first place: *trust minimization*. Every centralized custodian, media outlet, or data aggregator becomes a single point of failure, a potential attack vector, and a lever for control.

Non-custodial, open-source, verifiable tools aren't a niche preference — they're a prerequisite for sovereignty in the digital age. If your assets, identity, or transaction history can be frozen, altered, or surveilled by a third party, you don’t own them. You’re merely renting access.

The call to exit custodial systems isn't alarmism — it’s realism. The infrastructure of surveillance finance is being built in plain sight, and every hack or censorship incident should reinforce the urgency to opt out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom