Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← OKX NFT Aggregatorreviewed 2026-10-16 · 20 claims checked

Fact-check findings

What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read OKX NFT Aggregator 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.

disputed 5link rot 4partially supported 4confirmed 79 corrections pending · 0 applied

disputed

5 claims

The reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.

  1. #2[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Protocol Logic Incident: Smart Contract Storage Collision (June 2024)
    “The OKX NFT Aggregator's individual loss from this incident is cited in the arXiv paper but not broken out in isolation from the combined $6.9 million figure across the three affected protocols.”
    reviewerThe arXiv paper does not break out OKX NFT Aggregator's individual loss from the combined $6.9 million figureThis materially understates how small OKX NFT Aggregator's actual loss was (~$14k, not a share of $6.9M) and inflates the apparent severity of the incident by implying the breakdown is unavailable.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    The arXiv paper attributes approximately $14,000 in losses specifically to the OKX NFT Aggregator incident; the bulk of the combined $6.9 million figure — roughly $5.1 million — is attributed to the unrelated EFVault protocol.
    citedarxiv.org/html/2508.02145v1
  2. #7[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Lazarus Group Money Laundering via OKX Web3 Infrastructure (February-March 2025)
    “Malta's financial regulator — where OKX holds its EU crypto-asset service provider authorization — initiated a review of whether to revoke OKX's license under MiCA Article 64, which permits license withdrawal for entities that fail to prevent money laundering.”
    reviewerMalta's financial regulator initiated a review of whether to revoke OKX's MiCA license under MiCA Article 64None of the five cited sources name the MFSA or MiCA Article 64, or confirm that a formal revocation review was initiated. Independent reporting found only that some regulators floated the idea while Malta took no official action at the time. The page states as settled fact what was, at most, speculative commentary.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    Commentators noted that Malta's financial regulator, where OKX holds its EU crypto-asset service provider authorization, could in principle revoke OKX's license under MiCA Article 64, which permits license withdrawal for entities that fail to prevent money laundering, though no formal review was officially confirmed by Maltese regulators at the time.
    citedcryptoslate.com/okx-suspends-web3-aggreg…aundering-links/www.theblock.co/post/346538/okx-suspends…ened-eu-scrutinywww.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/o…o-launder-funds/cointelegraph.com/news/okx-suspends-dex-…r-misuse-lazaruscoinmarketcap.com/academy/article/okx-ha…u-investigations
  3. #13[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Platform Overview and Aggregation Architecture
    “In December 2023, OKX became the first multi-chain platform to support viewing and transfer of Bitcoin Ordinals.”
    reviewerIn December 2023, OKX became the first multi-chain platform to support viewing and transfer of Bitcoin OrdinalsThe 'first multi-chain platform' claim itself is plausible (an OKX company assertion) but the page has the wrong date by roughly eight months.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    In April 2023, OKX became the first multi-chain platform to support viewing and transfer of Bitcoin Ordinals.
  4. #15[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: User Complaints and Customer Service Risk Indicators
    “OKX as a parent platform holds a Trustpilot rating of approximately 2.2 out of 5 based on over 1,600 user reviews, with recurring complaints about frozen accounts, blocked withdrawals, and inadequate customer support responses.”
    reviewerOKX holds a Trustpilot rating of approximately 2.2 out of 5 based on over 1,600 user reviewsNeither the cited source nor live Trustpilot data supports the specific 2.2/5 figure; current Trustpilot shows 1.9/5. The review-count figure (1,600+) is roughly in line with live data.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    OKX as a parent platform holds a Trustpilot rating of approximately 1.9 out of 5 based on over 1,600 user reviews, with recurring complaints about frozen accounts, blocked withdrawals, and inadequate customer support responses.
    citedtradelize.com/crypto-exchange-reviews/okx-review/
  5. #16[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: ZachXBT Flagging and On-Chain Risk Context
    “OKX separately funded ZachXBT's investigation into alleged insider manipulation of the RAVE token in 2025, in which OKX founder Star pledged $25,000 in support — an action that situates OKX as both a flagged entity and a funder of on-chain investigations.”
    reviewerOKX funded ZachXBT's investigation into alleged RAVE token insider manipulation in 2025, with OKX founder Star pledging $25,000Dollar figure and the Star/OKX attribution are correct; only the year is wrong — the cited source itself dates the event to 2026, not 2025.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    OKX separately funded ZachXBT's investigation into alleged insider manipulation of the RAVE token in 2026, in which OKX founder Star pledged $25,000 in support — an action that situates OKX as both a flagged entity and a funder of on-chain investigations.
    citedcrypto.news/exchanges-face-heat-as-okx-f…o-95-rave-crash/

partially supported

4 claims

The cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.

  1. #4[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Parent Platform Exploit: OKX DEX Private Key Compromise (December 2023)
    “Three attacker addresses were identified by Arkham Intelligence and Neptune Mutual: 0xFacf375Af906f55453537ca31fFA99053A010239, 0x1F14E38666cDd8e8975f9acC09e24E9a28fbC42d, and 0x0519eFACB73A1f10b8198871E58D68864e78B8A5.”
    reviewerThree specific attacker addresses were identified by Arkham Intelligence and Neptune MutualThe three addresses themselves check out against independent on-chain reporting (an Odaily breakdown labels them attack-initiator and receiving/'OKX Exploiter 2/3' addresses), but the cited Block and CryptoBriefing articles do not name any addresses, and medium.com (Neptune Mutual) returned 403 and could not be directly verified. The specific attribution to 'Arkham Intelligence and Neptune Mutual' as the source of this address breakdown is unconfirmed from the sources actually cited.
    citedmedium.com/neptune-mutual/understanding-…oit-3fb7d826a621
  2. #10[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: DOJ Guilty Plea and $504 Million AML Settlement (February 2025)
    “A separate CFTC subpoena issued on February 24, 2024 remains ongoing, referencing alleged fraud and illegal activities in digital asset transactions.”
    reviewerA separate CFTC subpoena issued February 24, 2024 remains ongoing, referencing alleged fraud and illegal digital-asset activityThe subpoena's existence, date and subject are confirmed. Its status as 'ongoing' as of the page's effective date could not be independently confirmed or refuted — no 2025/2026 reporting of a resolution or closure was found, but none of the cited sources affirmatively state the matter remains open either.
  3. #11[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Platform Overview and Aggregation Architecture
    “As of 2024, the platform supported 21 blockchains, aggregated listings from approximately 32 external markets including OpenSea, MagicEden, LooksRare, and Blur, and indexed over 1.7 million NFT collections spanning 670 million individual tokens.”
    reviewerAs of 2024 the platform supported 21 blockchains and aggregated listings from approximately 32 external marketsThe 21-chains/32-markets figures are directly confirmed in the cited OKX page (via its archive, since the live URL now 404s). The '1.7 million NFT collections' and '670 million individual tokens' figures do not appear anywhere in that same archived page and could not be found in any other source searched; they are unverifiable as stated.
    citedwww.okx.com/en-eu/help/okx-nft-marketpla…ain-nft-universe
  4. #14[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Platform Overview and Aggregation Architecture
    “An iOS Remote Code Execution vulnerability in the OKX wallet app — which interfaces with the NFT Aggregator — was disclosed by CertiK on December 19, 2023; OKX patched the issue with version 6.45.0 and confirmed no customer assets were affected.”
    reviewerAn iOS RCE vulnerability in OKX wallet was disclosed by CertiK on Dec 19, 2023; OKX patched with version 6.45.0 and confirmed no customer assets were affectedThe underlying facts are accurate per later/other reporting, but the specific article cited by the page does not itself support the version number or the 'no assets affected' resolution — it reports the incident while the outcome was still unclear.
    citedwww.coindesk.com/business/2023/12/19/okx…de-vulnerability

confirmed

7 claims

The cited evidence supports the claim as written.

  1. #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Protocol Logic Incident: Smart Contract Storage Collision (June 2024)
    “According to a peer-reviewed security research paper published at arXiv (2508.02145), OKX NFT Aggregator was one of three protocols — alongside EFVault and PikeFinance — that collectively lost approximately $6.9 million due to this class of vulnerability.”
    reviewerarXiv paper (2508.02145) identifies OKX NFT Aggregator, EFVault and PikeFinance as collectively losing ~$6.9 million to a callee/callee storage-collision class vulnerabilityThe three-protocol grouping and combined figure are accurately drawn from the paper.
    citedarxiv.org/html/2508.02145v1
  2. #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Parent Platform Exploit: OKX DEX Private Key Compromise (December 2023)
    “On December 13, 2023, the OKX DEX — the decentralized exchange aggregator closely associated with the OKX NFT Aggregator infrastructure — was exploited for approximately $2.7 million.”
    reviewerOKX DEX was exploited for approximately $2.7 million on December 13, 2023 via a compromised Proxy Admin Owner keyMatches independently reported facts closely.
    citedwww.theblock.co/post/267405/okx-dex-suff…private-key-leakcointelegraph.com/news/okx-dex-2-7-m-exp…contract-upgradecryptobriefing.com/okx-dex-hacked-2-7-mi…rivate-key-leak/
  3. #5[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Parent Platform Exploit: OKX DEX Private Key Compromise (December 2023)
    “The same attacker was linked by on-chain analytics to prior exploits including LunaFi, Uno Re, and RVLT.”
    reviewerThe same attacker was linked by on-chain analytics to prior exploits of LunaFi, Uno Re, and RVLTMatches reporting.
    citedwww.theblock.co/post/267405/okx-dex-suff…private-key-leak
  4. #6[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Lazarus Group Money Laundering via OKX Web3 Infrastructure (February-March 2025)
    “On March 17, 2025, OKX voluntarily suspended its DEX aggregator services after consulting with regulators, citing the need to implement stronger anti-abuse controls and correct alleged incomplete labeling by blockchain explorers.”
    reviewerOn March 17, 2025, OKX voluntarily suspended its DEX aggregator after consulting with regulators, citing anti-abuse controls and explorer-labeling disputesWell supported by the cited reporting.
    citedcryptoslate.com/okx-suspends-web3-aggreg…aundering-links/www.theblock.co/post/346538/okx-suspends…ened-eu-scrutiny
  5. #8[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Lazarus Group Money Laundering via OKX Web3 Infrastructure (February-March 2025)
    “European regulators, convening through ESMA with representatives from all 27 EU member states on March 6, 2025, discussed whether OKX remained compliant with its MiCA license.”
    reviewerEuropean regulators convening through ESMA with representatives from all 27 EU member states discussed OKX's MiCA compliance on March 6, 2025Directly supported by the cited source.
    citedcryptoslate.com/okx-suspends-web3-aggreg…aundering-links/
  6. #9[confirmed][no action needed]in section: DOJ Guilty Plea and $504 Million AML Settlement (February 2025)
    “The company agreed to pay penalties totaling over $504 million, comprising a $420.3 million forfeiture of alleged ill-gotten gains and an $84.4 million criminal fine.”
    reviewerAux Cayes Fintech Co. Ltd pleaded guilty Feb 24, 2025 in SDNY, agreeing to pay $504M ($420.3M forfeiture + $84.4M fine), covering 2018-early 2024 conduct, $1T+ in transactions, $5B+ suspicious transactionsAll figures check out against multiple independent reports of the DOJ release.
    citedwww.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/okx-pleads-…es-pay-penalties
  7. #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Overview and Aggregation Architecture
    “on September 16, 2023, the OKX NFT Marketplace recorded a single-day trading volume of $11.54 million, a 114.5% increase from the prior day”
    reviewerOn September 16, 2023, OKX NFT Marketplace recorded a single-day trading volume of $11.54 million, a 114.5% increaseFigure and date corroborated by independent outlets; minor 114% vs 114.5% rounding difference is immaterial.
    citedwww.globenewswire.com/news-release/2023/…ding-Volume.html
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.