Physical violence targeting cryptocurrency holders is accelerating globally, with criminals increasingly shifting tactics from digital wallet hacks to real-world home invasions and armed coercion, according to a report published by blockchain security firm CertiK.
CertiK verified 52 physical attacks against digital asset holders worldwide during the first half of 2026, marking a 33% increase compared to the same period in the previous year. The total sum of recorded losses and ransom demands linked to these physical confrontations reached approximately $124 million, a sharp jump from $10.5 million during the first half of 2025, according to the blockchain security firm’s data.
Geographic Concentration and the Epicenter in France
France emerged as the primary global epicenter for these physical crypto attacks, accounting for 33 of the 52 verified incidents, which represents nearly two-thirds of publicly reported cases globally. According to CertiK researchers, France’s active cryptocurrency ecosystem, combined with multiple major data breaches exposing personal records, created an attractive environment for threat actors.
French interior ministry figures suggest the true volume of incidents is higher than public verifications show, placing total attacks at 77 through June. However, CertiK restricted its verified dataset strictly to publicly reported and independently verifiable cases sourced from law enforcement disclosures, court documents, reputable media reports, victim testimony, and on-chain evidence.
Beyond France, the United States recorded four verifiable wrench attacks during the period, while Sweden and the United Kingdom each logged two incidents.
Evolution of Tactics: Home Invasions Replace Kidnappings
The nature of physical targeting has evolved away from traditional street robberies toward highly coordinated residential attacks. CertiK verified 20 home invasions in the first six months of 2026, compared to just one during the same timeframe in 2025. Kidnappings grew at a slower pace, rising to 16 incidents from 12 the prior year.
Attackers routinely combine digital surveillance with physical violence. By stitching together blockchain records, leaked customer databases, social media profiles, and public records, criminals link pseudo-anonymous crypto addresses to real-world identities and home addresses, according to Ronghui Gu, co-founder of CertiK and a computer science professor at Columbia University.
“I wouldn’t describe this as just a physical security attack anymore,” Gu said in an interview. “It’s really a combination of cyberattacks, social engineering and physical attacks.”
High-profile incidents underscore the severity of the trend. In March, a couple living in the Paris suburb of Le Chesnay-Rocquencourt was beaten inside their residence and coerced into transferring approximately $1 million worth of Bitcoin. In a separate case in the United Kingdom, a victim was forced to surrender $24 million in digital assets, which perpetrators subsequently converted into the privacy-focused token Monero.
Organized Crime and Industry Security Implications
The sophistication of these operations points directly to organized criminal syndicates rather than isolated criminals. Investigations by French authorities revealed operations involving remote organizers who recruited local crews—frequently including minors—alongside data brokers supplying personal information and money launderers moving stolen funds.
This division of labor insulates masterminds while exposing ground-level participants to high physical and legal risks. Consequently, security experts emphasize that digital asset protection must extend beyond private key management and hardware wallets to include traditional operational security, physical surveillance awareness, and the safeguarding of personal identifying information.
Despite the steep rise in recorded figures, security researchers note that under-reporting remains widespread. Victims frequently withhold incidents from law enforcement due to fears of retaliation, reputational damage, potential tax exposure, or anticipated inaction by authorities.
Keep reading