Crypto casino and sportsbook Gamdom was still offline on Oct. 15 after a hot-wallet breach two days earlier led the company to halt operations and move remaining funds into cold storage. Founder Felix Romer said the incident cost just over $3 million, while outside blockchain analysis suggested the total impact may be higher.
The breach was tied to unauthorized access to an automation server. Although onchain trackers observed large transfers across several networks, a full forensic breakdown had not been released by Oct. 15, leaving some uncertainty over which movements reflected stolen assets and which were part of Gamdom’s emergency asset protection measures.
Shutdown followed Oct. 13 compromise
According to the extracted report, the incident began on Oct. 13 and involved transfers on Ethereum, Solana, and Tron. In response, Gamdom took the platform offline and began transferring remaining assets into cold storage as it worked to contain the breach.
Service had not been restored by Oct. 15. Romer acknowledged delays in bringing the platform back, and the company had not yet published a comprehensive account of what happened or a completed recovery timeline.
Loss estimates differ
Romer put the direct cost of the hot-wallet breach at a little over $3 million. Independent blockchain investigator vxdb, however, estimated the losses at around $4.2 million when looking across multiple networks, including Ethereum-compatible chains, Solana, Bitcoin, and Tron.
The gap between those figures had not been explained in the source material. One reason for the uncertainty is that ongoing internal transfers can make it difficult to separate funds taken by an attacker from assets that were moved by the company for safekeeping during the response.
Wallet balances shifted sharply
Blockchain monitoring highlighted how quickly Gamdom-linked wallets changed after the incident. Fairgambling’s tracker showed about $10.5 million in monitored holdings on Oct. 12, before dropping to roughly $76,000 the following day.
That decline does not, by itself, establish the size of the theft. The source article says assets were being moved into cold storage at the same time, which means the onchain outflows captured by trackers may include both unauthorized withdrawals and defensive transfers made by Gamdom.
Customer clarity remains unresolved
With the platform still unavailable, one practical issue for customers is understanding the difference between balances that were protected and accounts that may remain inaccessible while the system is restored. The source report noted that this distinction had become increasingly important as downtime continued.
As of Oct. 15, the next confirmed step was continued recovery work while Gamdom remained offline. Until the company releases a fuller forensic explanation, the exact loss total and the status of specific funds are likely to remain uncertain.
Source: news.bitcoin.com