Written by: Deep Wave TechFlow
In recent years, the crypto world has gradually developed into one of the most vibrant investment fields, but in this rapidly evolving digital realm, risks and opportunities coexist, and security issues require constant vigilance.
Based on this, Binance conducted a survey on 'Cryptocurrency User Security and Anti-Fraud Awareness', collecting a total of 7,967 Chinese questionnaire results.
Deep Wave TechFlow analyzed the data results of this survey and created this report, aiming to help users find direction and proceed safely in this crypto jungle.
This survey delves into users' security awareness in cryptocurrency asset trading and their ability to cope with risks, aiming to help users enhance their anti-fraud capabilities and strengthen risk management awareness, thereby better protecting their asset security. Binance's industry research not only provides users with practical educational resources but also reflects its continuous investment and commitment to user security education, demonstrating Binance's responsibility and commitment as a leading platform in promoting the security construction of the crypto ecosystem.
Highlights summary:
The cryptocurrency user group shows strong security awareness, such as actively taking protective measures, improving risk identification capabilities, and effectively utilizing the risk control mechanisms of centralized trading platforms.
80.8% of Binance users have enabled 2FA authentication.
Nearly four-fifths of users carefully verify the receiving address or smart contract address before each transfer.
The percentage of users saving private keys/mnemonic phrases on paper (47.8%) far exceeds the percentage of those stored on electronic devices (30.7%).
58.9% of users first contact the exchange to freeze assets after encountering a scam, showing significant trust in the exchange.
85.5% of respondents indicated that they trust exchange protection mechanisms (such as SAFU 'Binance Emergency Fund').
As high as 97.2% of users are willing to participate in anti-fraud simulation tests organized by trading platforms.
In the face of new scam methods, it is necessary to continually strengthen security education for users to enhance their awareness of potential threats.
X (formerly Twitter, 63.9%), Telegram (38.7%) are recognized by most as the most common channels for disseminating scam information.
77.4% of users have seen phishing links, and 60.8% have been tempted by 'authoritative figures' insider information and promotions.
Less than half of the users (48.9%) explicitly stated that they have not been exposed to scam information.
Chinese-speaking Cryptocurrency User Security Survey Report
This report is divided into the following five parts:
Part 1: Overview of the surveyed population
Part 2: Security awareness and behavior habits
Part 3: Experiences with scams and responses
Part 4: Demand for exchange security services
Part 5: Security features and education preferences
Part 1: Overview of the surveyed population
This chapter aims to create a comprehensive profile of respondents by collecting and analyzing basic information such as cryptocurrency trading experience, trading frequency, and asset scale. This will provide strong support for subsequent research and analysis.
Cryptocurrency trading experience
In this survey, we analyzed respondents' cryptocurrency trading experience. The data shows that the distribution of experience among Chinese-speaking users in the field of crypto trading is relatively balanced, providing a stable and diverse user base for the Chinese-speaking crypto market, which aids in the long-term development of the market.
Specifically, respondents with over three years of trading experience account for the highest proportion at 27.4%; followed by respondents with less than six months of experience at 26.8%; while those with 0.5-1 year and 1-3 years of experience account for 19.8% and 26% respectively. This phenomenon of new users entering the market while old users remain reflects the dynamism and vitality of the market.
Frequency of using cryptocurrency exchanges
In this survey, we statistically analyzed the frequency with which cryptocurrency traders use exchanges. The data shows that users who use exchanges multiple times a day account for the largest proportion, indicating that most traders are highly dependent on exchanges.
Specifically: 47.6% of respondents use cryptocurrency exchanges multiple times a day, 29.6% use them several times a week, 15.1% use them several times a month, while only 7.7% use them rarely.
Current scale of cryptocurrency assets held
Among cryptocurrency holders, most have assets concentrated below $10,000, accounting for 66.0%. This indicates that most investors are still in a relatively cautious investment phase, possibly due to significant market volatility or limited investment experience.
Investors holding assets between $10,000 and $100,000 account for 25.6%; this group may have a deeper understanding and confidence in the market, hence willing to invest more. Investors holding between $100,000 and $500,000 account for only 5.2%, while high-net-worth investors holding over $500,000 account for just 3.2%.
Part 2: Security awareness and behavior habits
In the cryptocurrency field, security and trust are among the most concerning issues for users. This chapter collects and analyzes respondents' enabled security measures in their Binance accounts, gaining insights into users' security awareness and strategies, covering enabled security measures, methods of saving private keys, types of scams encountered, and more, revealing the security challenges faced by users in cryptocurrency trading.
Enabled Binance account security measures
In this questionnaire survey, we conducted a detailed statistical analysis of the security measures enabled in respondents' Binance accounts. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options. Specifically:
The proportion of users enabling 2FA authentication is the highest, reaching 80.8%—such a high ratio indicates that most users recognize the importance of two-factor authentication and prioritize this measure to protect account security. In addition, independent trading passwords are also valued, with more than half (53%) of respondents setting independent trading passwords. The percentage of users enabling whitelist addresses is 21%, which can effectively prevent funds from being transferred to unauthorized addresses. The usage rate of anti-phishing verification codes is 29.3%, indicating that some users have a certain level of awareness against phishing attacks. Additionally, 1.6% of users chose other security measures, showing diversity in users' security strategies.
However, 10.4% of users have not enabled any additional security measures, which may be due to a lack of security awareness or believing that setting up security measures is too complicated.
Overall, most users have already taken various security measures to protect their Binance accounts, but some users still need to strengthen their security awareness and measures.
Do you check the receiving address/smart contract address before transferring?
According to research data, most users meticulously check the receiving address or smart contract address before a transfer, with a rate of 79.2%, indicating that users generally recognize the importance of verifying addresses to avoid transfer errors and potential financial losses.
13.9% of users remain cautious most of the time but may not check addresses in certain situations.
Occasionally verifying addresses accounts for 5.3%, indicating that these users may recognize the importance of verification but have not developed a stable habit.
From the overall data, the vast majority of users check the receiving/smart contract address before transferring, reflecting a high emphasis on the security of funds. Notably, there are still 1.6% of users who never check transfer addresses, indicating a need to strengthen attention to transfer security.
When using a decentralized wallet, how to save private keys/mnemonic phrases?
Decentralized wallets allow users to have complete autonomy over their private keys and assets, but they also face management difficulties and risks of losing private keys. In the survey, 47.8% of users choose paper offline backup when using decentralized wallets, which is a traditional and secure method that effectively prevents digital device failures or cyber attacks. Meanwhile, 10% of users store private keys or mnemonic phrases using hardware wallets, indicating that this group prefers specialized devices to enhance security. At the same time, 8.8% of users choose to use encrypted digital file storage, which offers convenient access while protecting privacy.
A significant proportion (30.7%) of users also choose to store private keys or mnemonic phrases directly on their phones, computers, or cloud drives. Although this method is convenient, it poses security risks such as device theft or cyber attacks.
Additionally, 2.7% of users chose other storage methods, indicating diversity in users' security strategies.
Overall, most users tend to use safer methods to save private keys or mnemonic phrases, but some users still need to improve their security awareness to avoid potential risks.
Types of scams encountered
In this questionnaire survey, we counted the types of cryptocurrency scams that respondents have seen. The survey shows that while the types of scams are increasing, phishing link scams remain the most common form. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options. The proportions of each option are:
77.4% of users have seen phishing links, a common form of online fraud that typically masquerades as legitimate websites to steal user information.
60.8% of users have encountered so-called insider information or promotions from 'authoritative figures', a scam that exploits users' trust in authority to mislead investment decisions.
51.7% of users have seen scams leaking private information, such as passwords, private keys, or mnemonic phrases, which directly threaten users' asset security.
56.6% of users have seen scams involving false airdrops, giveaways, or token presales, which deceive users by exploiting their desire for freebies or discounts.
51.6% of users have seen fake exchange apps or wallets, a scam that tricks users into losing assets by masquerading as legitimate applications.
48.8% of users have encountered Ponzi schemes and multi-level marketing scams, which attract investors by promising high returns but actually rely on the funds of later investors to pay earlier ones.
Victims of malware attacks account for 33.2%, as such attacks implant malicious software to steal user information or control user devices.
False investment promises (such as high-yield mining pools) are also a common scam seen by 44.9% of users, where such scams often attract investments with unrealistic high returns.
2.3% of users have seen other types of scams, indicating that scam methods are becoming increasingly diverse and difficult to guard against.
Part 3: Scam experiences and responses
This section focuses on the scams that respondents have actually encountered, covering loss amounts, remedial measures after encountering scams, and common channels for scam information. By comprehensively statistically analyzing these real-world scenarios, we aim to help users improve their vigilance and more effectively prevent cryptocurrency scams.
Have you encountered cryptocurrency-related scams?
We investigated whether users have encountered cryptocurrency scams; surprisingly, nearly half (41.7%) of users have fallen victim to cryptocurrency-related scams; among the remaining users, 9.4% are unsure if they have encountered scams, while only 48.9% explicitly stated they have not.
Overall, cryptocurrency scams remain a significant security issue today, requiring increased user vigilance and discernment.
Scale of funds lost in cryptocurrency-related fraud
We investigated the scale of funds lost by users in cryptocurrency-related fraud, and the data shows:
65.4% of users have not fallen for scams, showing strong awareness of prevention.
8.3% of users fell for scams but did not incur losses, possibly having taken timely remedial measures.
13.7% of users lost less than $1,000, indicating that small losses are relatively common.
8.3% of users lost between $1,000 and $10,000, suggesting that moderate-sized losses also exist.
4.3% of users lost more than $10,000, indicating that a small number of users suffered serious financial losses.
Overall, although most users have not suffered losses, there is still a need to strengthen prevention to avoid potential financial losses.
Measures to take first after encountering a scam
Due to the decentralized nature of blockchain, stolen cryptocurrencies are often difficult to recover. Our survey shows that over half of users first contact exchanges to freeze assets after encountering scams. Notably, the proportion of users who choose to claim losses and not pursue them ranks second. The specific data is:
58.9% of users first contact the exchange to freeze assets, showing the importance of protecting fund security.
13.6% of users choose to report to local law enforcement, indicating that they wish to resolve issues through legal means.
10.8% of users publicly warn in the community to alert others to similar risks.
15.5% of users claim not to pursue losses, possibly due to the losses being small or believing that pursuing them is futile.
1.2% of users took other measures, reflecting the diversity of responses.
Overall, most users tend to take proactive measures to protect their interests, with contacting the exchange being the choice of most users, indicating their trust in exchanges led by Binance; however, some users still choose to accept losses, reflecting the challenges of recovering from cryptocurrency scams, which deserves more attention.
The social media channels where scam information is 'most commonly seen' in the region
In this survey, we conducted a detailed statistical analysis of the most commonly seen channels for disseminating scam information in respondents' regions. This survey helps us understand the influence of different social media platforms in spreading scam information. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options.
Major dissemination channels:
X (formerly Twitter): 63.9% is the most commonly recognized channel for scam information dissemination, showing its powerful influence in information transmission.
Telegram: 38.7% also occupies a large proportion, indicating its widespread use in the cryptocurrency community.
Facebook: 30.9% and LINE: 27.7% are also frequently mentioned, showing their popularity in certain regions.
Secondary dissemination channels:
TikTok: 19.3% and Instagram: 19.1% indicate that these visual content platforms have also become channels for disseminating scam information.
WhatsApp: 8.4% and other channels: 6.3% reflect that users occasionally encounter scam information on other platforms.
Less frequently mentioned channels:
Reddit: 3%, Medium: 2.5%, Kakao Talk: 2.1%, Zalo: 1.7%, Naver Blog: 1.5% and other channels have low proportions, indicating differences in platform preferences among users in different regions.
Overall, although some platforms like X and Telegram dominate in the dissemination of scam information, other social media platforms should not be overlooked. Users need to remain vigilant across various platforms to prevent the harm of scam information.
Part 4: Demand for exchange security services
This chapter focuses on the role Binance plays in helping users deal with cryptocurrency scams. The issues range from Binance's official verification channels, identifying the authenticity of Binance information, seeking help from Binance, to the security measures that exchanges/decentralized wallets hope to strengthen, as well as Binance's security products and anti-fraud education, painting a picture of Binance's attempts to prevent cryptocurrency scams.
Binance official verification channel
The Binance official verification channel is a method provided by Binance for users to verify the identity of employees. Users can enter a website, email address, phone number, Telegram, or social media account to check whether the source is verified and comes from Binance officially. In this survey, we counted whether respondents were aware that they could confirm if someone is an official Binance employee through the 'Binance official verification channel' page.
The data shows: 50.5% of respondents stated that they know they can confirm employee identities through the 'Binance Official Verification Channel'. Meanwhile, 49.5% of respondents indicated that they are unaware of this verification channel.
Although half of the users are aware of verification channels, there is still a need to strengthen publicity about official verification methods.
Identifying the authenticity of received Binance information
In this survey, we conducted a detailed statistical analysis of the methods respondents use to identify the authenticity of Binance information. This survey helps us understand the different measures users take to confirm the authenticity of information. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options. Based on the survey results, we categorized users' identification methods into three types:
Primary identification method:
Checking the announcement area on the Binance official website: the most commonly used method, with most users (74.8%) preferring to obtain authoritative information through the official website.
Comparing through the Binance APP's 'Announcement Center' or 'Message' list: selected by 71.2% of users, authoritative official announcements are often the most trusted verification method for users.
Secondary identification method:
Verifying sender information in the 'Binance Official Verification Channel': Although this is also an official channel, only a portion of users (35.8%) choose it, possibly due to unfamiliarity with this channel.
Viewing official information published by Binance officials or social media verified accounts: 32.8% of users rely on social media for information.
Other methods:
Confirming with Binance staff or Binance angels: 22.3% of users choose to communicate with staff in the community to confirm information.
Others: A very small number (1.1%) of users use other unique methods for verification.
Overall, most users rely on official channels and applications to confirm the authenticity of information, but some users also conduct multiple verifications through social media and direct communication. This indicates that users adopt diverse strategies to ensure the accuracy and reliability of information in terms of identification, but more users will confirm official website information first, taking the official announcements as the standard.
When encountering suspicious behavior during transactions, how do you seek Binance's help?
In this survey, we conducted a detailed statistical analysis of the methods respondents use to seek help when encountering suspicious behavior during transactions. This survey helps us understand users' coping measures when facing potential risks. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options. We categorized users' methods of seeking help into three types:
Primary methods of seeking help:
Most users (73%) prefer to directly contact Binance online customer service for help.
71.4% of users report scams on the Binance 'Fraud Reporting' page after encountering scams.
Secondary methods of seeking help:
44.1% of users seek help from official personnel or the community for additional support and advice.
Other methods:
It is worth noting that 7.9% of users are unclear about how to seek help when encountering problems.
0.6% of users adopt other uncommon methods to seek help.
Overall, most users tend to seek help through official channels such as customer service and reporting pages, and the Binance 'Fraud Reporting' link is also familiar and chosen by more users. However, some users still rely on community support or are unclear about how to respond, indicating that user security education still needs to be strengthened to ensure that all users can receive timely help when encountering problems.
The type of security protection that users most wish exchanges to strengthen
In this survey, we conducted a detailed statistical analysis of the types of security protections that users hope exchanges will strengthen. This survey helps us understand users' specific demands for enhancing security during transactions. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options. We categorized the results into three types based on importance.
Primary focus:
71.8% of users hope the exchange can conduct real-time interception of high-risk transactions, showing a strong awareness of the immediate risks that may arise during transactions, and hoping the exchange can proactively identify and prevent potential threats.
64.8% indicate that users hope the exchange can provide a comprehensive database of scam addresses for verification before transactions. This reflects users' awareness of preventing known scams and their demand for preventive protection from exchanges.
Secondary focus:
58.3% of users focus on device security, hoping that exchanges can provide solutions to prevent malware. This indicates that users recognize the importance of device security to overall transaction safety.
51% of users show interest in enhancing security through biometric technology, hoping that exchanges will strengthen the integration of biometric authentication, indicating a positive attitude towards the application of new technologies in identity verification.
Other concerns:
45.8% of users hope to receive alerts when abnormal operations occur, showing an expectation that exchanges can timely notify users of potential risks.
39.5% of users hope that human customer service can provide anti-fraud support, emphasizing the importance of human support in complex fraud situations.
38.8% of users hope that exchanges can provide more anti-phishing education, indicating a certain demand for users to enhance their security awareness.
0.9% show other specific personalized security needs.
Overall, users' demand for exchange security protection mainly focuses on real-time monitoring, preventive measures, and the application of emerging technologies, while also hoping to enhance their security awareness through education and human support. This indicates that exchanges need to adopt a dual approach in technology and services to meet users' diversified security needs.
The types of security protection that users most hope decentralized wallets will strengthen
We investigated users' specific needs for wallet security protection; this question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options.
On the wallet side, 67.7% of users hope that wallets can strengthen private key management, while 54.7% of users wish to enhance security backup and recovery options.
Regarding external risks, 60% of users emphasize the importance of phishing dApp detection, 52.3% of users hope to enhance detection of phishing transactions, and 58.5% of respondents hope to identify hacker attacks more effectively. Additionally, 47.3%, 46.7%, 46.2%, and 43.7% of users wish to strengthen monitoring of token, transaction, authorization, and similar address poisoning transactions.
0.8% of users proposed other personalized security needs.
These data indicate that users have multifaceted demands for the security features of decentralized wallets, especially regarding private key management and phishing attack prevention, which provides a direction for subsequent optimization by the platform.
Do you trust the asset protection mechanisms of exchanges (such as Binance's SAFU fund)?
In cryptocurrency trading, the asset protection mechanisms of exchanges (such as Binance's SAFU fund) play an important role. We investigated users' trust in these mechanisms.
Specifically, 39.6% of users expressed complete trust in the asset protection mechanisms of exchanges; 45.9% of users held a general trust attitude; only 2.1% of users expressed distrust, while 12.4% indicated that they were unaware of these mechanisms.
The survey results show that the vast majority of users have a certain level of trust in the asset protection mechanisms of exchanges. However, some users need more information to enhance their understanding and trust in these mechanisms. Exchanges can further enhance user confidence in their security measures through transparent information disclosure and user education.
Areas for improvement in the platform's anti-fraud education content
As cryptocurrency-related scams continue to evolve, the importance of the platform's anti-fraud education content is increasingly highlighted. We investigated areas where users believe these contents can be improved. This question is multiple-choice, and each respondent can select multiple options.
49.7% of users believe that the frequency of anti-fraud education content push is too low and suggest increasing the frequency to enhance users' vigilance and knowledge.
42.2% of users indicated that the frequency of anti-fraud content push is too low, suggesting an increase to enhance user vigilance and knowledge.
46.2% of users pointed out that anti-fraud education content lacks localized cases, hoping to see real cases related to their living environment to improve the relevance and practicality of the content.
34% of users believe that the current interaction forms are too singular, suggesting a more diverse range of interaction methods to enhance user participation and learning outcomes.
Moreover, 2.5% of users proposed other improvement suggestions, indicating their personalized needs for anti-fraud education content.
The survey results indicate that users' understanding and acceptance of the platform's anti-fraud education content need improvement, to enhance the efficiency of anti-fraud education in ways that better meet user needs and help users better identify and prevent online fraud.
Part 5: Security features and education preferences
This chapter focuses on users' anti-fraud awareness, emphasizing their tendencies to accept security alerts and participate in anti-fraud simulation tests organized by the platform, which helps the platform more effectively assist users in identifying cryptocurrency-related scams and preventing them.
Tendency to receive security alerts
In today's world where information security is increasingly important, users have different preferences for receiving security alerts. We investigated users' specific tendencies in this regard.
55.1% of users prefer to receive security alerts through app pop-ups, push notifications, or internal messages. This immediate notification method is considered the most effective reminder method by most users.
25.8% of users prefer to receive security alerts via email. This method is suitable for users who frequently check their emails in work or daily life.
12.8% of users choose SMS reminders, reminding us that traditional methods should not be overlooked.
5.9% of users prefer to receive security alerts through social media or community announcements, which may not be widely accepted because users cannot obtain information in real-time.
0.4% of users suggested other ways to receive alerts, showing personalized needs among a small number of users.
Survey results show that most users prefer to receive security alerts through immediate app notifications. However, to meet the different preferences of users, the platform can provide multiple notification methods to ensure that security information can be effectively and timely conveyed to all users.
Willingness to participate in anti-fraud simulation tests organized by the platform (such as identifying phishing links)
Anti-fraud simulation tests are important means to enhance users' security awareness and skills. We investigated users' willingness to participate in anti-fraud simulation tests organized by the platform.
Specifically, 59.2% of users expressed willingness to participate in anti-fraud simulation tests, 38% of users' willingness depends on rewards, and only 2.8% of users are unwilling to participate.
This indicates that the vast majority of users hold an open attitude towards participating in such tests. The platform can also improve user participation by designing reasonable incentive mechanisms, thereby enhancing users' security prevention capabilities and awareness.
