Analysis: Deception of fraud victims through worthless tokens with identical names to well-known cryptocurrencies
An increasingly common scam in the field of investment and recovery fraud no longer relies on fake transfer confirmations, but on genuine, visible blockchain transactions: Victims are credited with purported cryptocurrencies that visually resemble established tokens such as USDT, USDC, ETH, or BTC. In reality, however, these are self-created, worthless tokens that merely bear the same or a nearly identical name.
For technically inexperienced investors, this often results in a balance in the millions appearing in their wallet or on a blockchain explorer. However, these tokens have no market value, cannot be traded on any reputable exchange, and were created solely for deceptive purposes.
Why anyone can create their own "USDT"
On virtually all modern blockchains – Ethereum, BNB Chain, Tron, Solana, and others – anyone can create their own token within minutes. Users can freely define the token's name, its symbol, the number of units, the logo, and its description. There is no technical requirement for the name to be unique.
This allows multiple tokens with almost identical names to exist in parallel – for example, the actual Tether alongside variants such as "USDT Token", "Tether USD", "USDT ERC20", or "USDT Official". Each of these tokens has its own completely independent smart contract.
The real deception
Scammers are deliberately exploiting this situation. They create a token called "USDT" or "Tether USD" and then transfer it to the victim's wallet. Since many wallet apps initially only display the token's name, the investor assumes they have received genuine Tether. Only upon closer technical examination does it become apparent that the smart contract is completely different from the original.
Why the name has no meaning
With cryptocurrencies, the displayed name is not decisive; only the underlying technical identifier matters – the smart contract address in the case of Ethereum or the BNB Chain, the mint address in the case of Solana, the asset ID, or the issuer address in other networks such as XRP. This address functions like a serial number; the name, on the other hand, is merely a freely chosen display text without any evidentiary value.
The genuine USDT has clearly defined, publicly known contract addresses on every blockchain, for example:
Ethereum: 0xdAC17F958D2ee523a2206206994597C13D831ec7
BNB Chain: 0x55d398326f99059fF775485246999027B3197955
Tron: TR7NHqjeKQxGTCi8q8ZY4pL8otSzgjLj6t
If, instead, a token exists at a completely different address, for example starting with „0x91b2…“, it is a completely different, independent token despite the identical name „USDT“.
The typical fraud pattern
In numerous investigated cases, the scam follows a very similar pattern. Initially, the victim invests real money, whereupon the platform displays high fictitious profits. Instead of an actual payout, the victim suddenly receives tokens in their wallet – for example, 500,000 USDT, 2 million USDC, or 1,000 ETH. While these tokens bear the familiar name, they are technically worthless.
The scammer then tells the victim that the payment has been made or that the funds are already in their wallet. If the victim tries to sell the tokens, error messages such as "No liquidity," "Token not supported," "Trading disabled," or "Unknown token" appear – the supposed asset simply cannot be converted into real money.
Why Blockchain Explorers Can Be Deceiving
Explorers like Etherscan, BscScan, Tronscan, or Solscan often initially display only the token name prominently. While the contract address, creator, number of holders, liquidity, and trading volume are visible, they require closer examination, which many victims fail to undertake.
Typical characteristics of worthless fake tokens
Forensic investigations regularly reveal the same anomalies in such tokens:
- Not listed on a reputable stock exchange and no liquidity through a suitable pool.
- No pricing Services like CoinMarketCap or CoinGecko simply don't recognize the token.
- Few Holders, often only the fraudster and the victim are listed as the sole addresses.
- Complete control the creator has Mint, Freeze or Owner rights, which allows any number of additional tokens to be created.
Other deception methods
Besides identical names, nearly identical spellings are frequently used – for example, „USDT.“, „USDT_“, „USD-T“, „USDTT“, or „USDT Official“. Many wallets also automatically adopt logos, further creating the impression of an official token. Even more frequently, however, alleged balances are displayed exclusively on fraudulent trading platforms that are not backed by any real blockchain – the supposed balances are then simply entries in a database.
Forensic investigation
Therefore, blockchain analysis never evaluates the displayed name alone. The analysis also examines the smart contract itself, the token creator, the mint address, the total supply, the holder structure, existing trading platforms and liquidity pools, available price sources, as well as the contract's history and creation date. Only the completeness of this information allows for a reliable evaluation.
Significance for investigations
The appearance of a worthless token does not typically represent an actual asset, but is often a further element of the fraudulent activity itself. From a criminal law perspective, this can be additional evidence of intent to deceive, the concealment of the true flow of assets, or the misrepresentation of non-existent assets. Therefore, it is crucial for law enforcement agencies and courts to assess a token not based on its name, but on its technical identity and actual tradability.
Conclusion
The name of a token says nothing about its authenticity or value. On most blockchains, any number of tokens with identical or nearly identical names can be created – the only identifying factor is the respective smart contract, mint, or asset address. In numerous investigated crypto fraud cases, perpetrators deliberately exploit this technical possibility to give victims the impression that they have received valuable cryptocurrencies such as USDT, USDC, or ETH. In reality, these are often self-created, worthless tokens without liquidity, market price, or tradability.
A forensic blockchain analysis must therefore always verify the technical identity of a token and its actual marketability before any reliable conclusions can be drawn about existing assets.
Do you suspect you received worthless fake tokens instead of real payouts?
Financial forensics examines the technical identity of tokens for affected parties, documents smart contract data, holder structure and tradability, and prepares the results in a legally admissible manner for criminal charges and civil proceedings. Contact: postfach@finanz-forensik.de
