← ALEX Labreviewed 2026-10-27 · 9 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read ALEX Lab against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
Read this first
These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.
“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.
Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.
unverifiable
4 claimsNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #4[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: May 2024 XLink bridge exploit ($4.3 million)
“About 3 million of the stolen STX was sent to centralized exchanges including Binance, Kraken, OKX, Bybit and KuCoin.”
reviewerAbout 3 million STX was sent to exchanges including Binance, Kraken, OKX, Bybit and KuCoin.I did not check the Rekt or CertiK pages for the exchange list, and the Cointelegraph article does not give it. Not verified. - #5[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Alleged Lazarus Group attribution
“On June 25, 2024, ALEX Lab publicly attributed the May 2024 exploit to the Lazarus Group”
reviewerALEX Lab attributed the May 2024 exploit to the Lazarus Group on June 25, 2024, with ZachXBT, over 11,800 STX transactions, and no confirmed government indictment.The Cryptonews fetch returned 403. The attribution is consistent with a June 2025 search snippet from the protocol and its framing as alleged is appropriately hedged. I did not read the other cited outlets. - #8[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“ALEX Lab Foundation announces completion of the Treasury Grant Program, stating that all eligible users received 100% reimbursement in USDC.”
reviewerTimeline entries for the Treasury Grant Program completion (100% reimbursement) and the July 2025 farming resumption carry no source.The timeline entry has an empty source. Section 4 cites the ALEX Medium post for this, which I did not verify. The 'Farming resumes' entry (timeline[13]) has the same gap. - #9[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Overview and background
“DeFiLlama data in mid-2025 showed TVL of approximately $822,000.”
reviewerALEX reported TVL above $80 million before the 2024 exploit, and DeFiLlama showed about $822,000 in mid-2025.DeFiLlama returned 403, and it is a live dashboard that does not show a fixed mid-2025 figure. The archive snapshot is dated November 2025, not mid-2025.
confirmed
5 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: May 2024 XLink bridge exploit ($4.3 million)
“losses were reported at roughly $4.3 million in total”
reviewerThe May 2024 XLink exploit cost roughly $4.3 million, including about $300,000 in Bitcoin, $3.3 million in stablecoins and $75,000 in SKO tokens.CoinDesk matches the total and the asset breakdown. CoinDesk dates the exploit to early Wednesday, May 15, 2024; the page already says that reports differ on the exact dates. - #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Fund recovery and reimbursement
“with a deadline of May 18, 2024 at 08:00 UTC”
reviewerALEX Lab offered a 10% bounty for return of 90% of the stolen assets, with a May 18, 2024 08:00 UTC deadline.Terms confirmed. - #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Fund recovery and reimbursement
“Exchange cooperation froze more than $3.9 million of stolen assets, reported as of May 16, 2024, pending investigation.”
reviewerMore than $3.9 million of stolen assets was frozen at exchanges as of May 16, 2024.Confirmed. The article does not name the exchanges. The named list in section 1 (Binance, Kraken, OKX, Bybit, KuCoin) is not covered by the sources I could read. - #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: June 2025 smart contract vault exploit
“According to Halborn, the root cause was failed access control in the protocol's self-listing verification logic and vault permission system.”
reviewerThe June 2025 exploit was caused by failed access control in vault and self-listing logic, via the malicious token ssl-labubu-672d3; Halborn estimates total losses at $16.18M and says the code was outside prior audit scope.Matches. The Halborn page gives only the month, not the day or 09:30 UTC time. The June 6 date is corroborated by a search summary but the 09:30 UTC time was not verified. - #7[confirmed][no action needed]in section: June 2025 smart contract vault exploit
“ALEX Lab suspended operations and opened an investigation, and the ALEX token fell about 45% after the announcement.”
reviewerThe ALEX token fell about 45% after the June 2025 announcement and the ALEX Lab Foundation pledged full reimbursement.Supported by search summaries of multiple outlets. I did not fetch The Block directly.
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.