The Canadian crypto exchange TradeOgre, popular among advocates of anonymous transactions and actively used for Monero transactions, stopped communicating with clients in late July. On the same day, July 29, 2025, its website went down, and public updates ceased. The lack of activity sparked numerous speculations, ranging from a system glitch to a possible hack.
However, several weeks later, concrete evidence emerged. According to the analytics firm Arkham Intelligence, on September 16, a total of approximately $32 million was transferred from TradeOgre wallets to addresses associated with Canadian government agencies. Within four hours, 126 bitcoins worth approximately $15 million were transferred, along with another $17 million in Ethereum.
Op_return messages accompanying the transactions, left on the Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains, attracted particular attention. They stated: "Crypto assets controlled by the RCMP." These markings have fueled speculation about the possible confiscation of the exchange's funds by government agencies. However, Canadian authorities have not yet officially confirmed this information, leaving room for doubt and debate in the crypto community.
This situation unfolds amid active efforts by Canadian law enforcement agencies to combat cryptocurrency crime. Shortly before this, the RCMP, along with Vancouver and Delta police, conducted a two-day operation aimed at uncovering fraudulent schemes. The investigation identified 89 victims who entrusted their funds to dubious projects and lost over $4 million.
The TradeOgre incident raises serious questions about the reliability of anonymous platforms and their future in the face of growing regulatory pressure. For many users, the platform's disappearance and the sudden transfer of funds confirmed the risks associated with choosing exchanges that do not adhere to standard security and KYC procedures.
The crypto community is now focused on whether Canadian authorities will issue an official statement and whether funds will be returned to the affected users. At the same time, the case could set a precedent for more active government intervention in the activities of platforms operating without strict customer identification rules.