Banks vs. crypto companies: Who better protects your money from hackers?

​Cryptocurrency exchanges are frequently criticized for security failures, while traditional banks are generally considered safer places to keep money. Yet hackers target both industries, often exploiting similar weaknesses. Are banks really better protected, or do the risks simply look different?

French bank faces allegations of a $133 million crypto theft

A major cryptocurrency theft has put one of France's banking groups under scrutiny, raising fresh questions about the security of traditional financial institutions. Crédit Mutuel Arkéa has confirmed an attack that enabled fraudulent transactions, although it has not disclosed the financial impact. Blockchain investigator ZachXBT identified the bank as the suspected victim on November 4 after tracing suspicious withdrawals from several major cryptocurrency exchanges.

View post on X Loading...

The tweet was deleted by the author.

But we saved everything 🙂.

ZachXBT initially flagged more than $106 million in suspicious withdrawals from an unidentified European financial institution. Another $27 million was subsequently identified, bringing the estimated losses above $133 million. The investigator warned that additional transactions outside exchanges could increase the figure.

Blockchain analytics firm Bitquery separately traced approximately $108.8 million in USDC withdrawn from accounts at Kraken, Crypto.com, and OKX over roughly 21 hours. Some funds were converted into Ether and moved through multiple wallets. Kraken and Crypto.com reported restricting accounts or blocking funds linked to the suspected theft.

Crédit Mutuel Arkéa said it had temporarily suspended certain transactions, notified authorities, and brought the situation under control. The bank also assured customers that they would face no financial consequences. How the attackers gained access to the funds remains unclear.

Why traditional banks remain attractive targets for hackers

Banks manage large volumes of payments and sensitive customer information, making them attractive targets for cybercriminals. But the risks go beyond the money they hold. Modern banking depends on interconnected systems, outside technology providers, and employees with access to critical operations. Attackers only need to find one weakness to potentially disrupt services, steal data, or initiate unauthorized transfers.

Recent figures suggest that banks remain exposed, although their defenses may be improving. A June 2026 report from the European Banking Authority found that 44% of surveyed banks had experienced cyberattacks that caused or threatened major IT disruptions in the first half of the year. That was down from 58% in early 2025, suggesting some improvement in security, although serious threats remain widespread. 

One particularly difficult problem is that banks cannot control every system they rely on. A security failure at an outside provider can affect several institutions simultaneously. Cybersecurity firm Black Kite recorded 202 ransomware incidents targeting financial institutions in 2025, up 30% from the previous year. In South Korea, an attack on a technology provider affected 32 financial institutions and exposed more than two terabytes of data.

Meanwhile, artificial intelligence is giving attackers new tools to exploit these weaknesses. Criminals can use AI to create convincing phishing messages, impersonate employees, or automate parts of an attack. Binance founder Changpeng Zhao recently suggested that banks could be more vulnerable than crypto exchanges as cyber threats evolve. His assessment remains difficult to verify, however, because comparable data do not establish which industry is more vulnerable.

View post on X Loading...

The tweet was deleted by the author.

But we saved everything 🙂.

Why crypto hacks are more visible and harder to reverse

Cryptocurrency companies face similar threats, including stolen credentials, compromised devices, and unauthorized access to internal systems. The difference is what can happen once attackers gain control of assets. Transfers confirmed on a blockchain are generally irreversible, and stolen funds can move rapidly between wallets.

The scale of potential losses became clear on October 29, when Binance reported a security breach involving approximately $6.3 billion in digital assets. Preliminary findings pointed to compromised employee devices, internal systems, and wallet transaction permissions, although the investigation remained ongoing. Binance said it would cover customer losses and worked with other platforms and stablecoin issuers to freeze affected funds.

Banks can often delay suspicious transfers or attempt payment recalls through established networks. Crypto exchanges can also block withdrawals before assets leave their platforms, but recovering funds afterward is harder. At the same time, public blockchains allow investigators to trace transfers between wallets, even when the people controlling them remain unidentified.

That visibility helped researchers follow suspicious transactions in the Crédit Mutuel Arkéa case. It does not guarantee recovery: attackers may split funds across wallets, exchange them for other assets, or use services that obscure their trail. Tracing transactions and identifying criminals are separate challenges.

What actually makes customers' money safer?

For customers, the crucial question is what happens after an attack. Traditional banks generally have procedures for investigating unauthorized payments and reimbursing eligible customers. European payment rules provide protections in certain cases, while deposit insurance addresses bank failure rather than every type of cyber loss.

Crypto exchanges use safeguards such as withdrawal limits, transaction monitoring, multiple approvals, and offline storage. Some maintain funds to compensate users after security incidents. But protections differ by platform and jurisdiction, and crypto holdings generally do not have the same guarantees as insured bank deposits.

Neither industry can claim immunity from cybercrime, and available data do not establish that banks are universally safer than cryptocurrency companies. For customers, the real test of security is not whether an institution can prevent every attack, but whether their money remains protected when one succeeds.