- Trending
- Comments
- Latest
Fake accounts impersonating generative artist Tyler Hobbs are pushing a bogus QQL NFT sale, and at least one collector has reportedly lost funds. Yuga Labs blockchain vice president Quit warned on October 20 that public minting has not reopened, and that the scam reuses the 900-pass supply and 50 ETH starting price from QQL’s 2022 auction.
“PSA QQL minting has not reopened,” Quit wrote, adding that one person had reportedly lost funds while another avoided a similar outcome with assistance from the Pocket Universe security tool.
The reported theft has not been independently verified. Quit did not disclose the affected wallet addresses, transaction hashes or the amount allegedly stolen, leaving the precise scale and mechanics of the incident unclear.
The reported impersonation campaign appears to draw on details from QQL’s original launch, potentially making the fraudulent promotion more convincing to collectors familiar with the project.
Created by Hobbs and Dandelion Mané, QQL is a collaborative generative art project that allows collectors to explore outputs produced by an algorithm and choose which artworks become permanent non-fungible tokens. Rather than automatically receiving a predetermined piece at the time of purchase, collectors can select the generated artwork they want to include in the collection.
The project launched in September 2022, when 900 Mint Passes were offered to the public through a Dutch auction. The remaining 99 passes were reserved for other purposes, bringing the collection’s planned supply to 999.
The original auction began at 50 ETH per pass before the clearing price settled at 14 ETH. The sale reportedly generated 12,600 ETH, worth approximately $16.7 million at the time, according to contemporary reporting by Crypto Briefing and The Block.
The auction also incorporated a rebate mechanism that allowed successful participants to pay the final clearing price rather than necessarily paying their initial, higher bids.
The alleged scammers reportedly reused the same supply figure and starting price while claiming that the new offering was connected to partnerships involving the original creators. However, the available information does not establish whether the attackers copied the original promotional material in full or simply reused selected details.
The distinction matters because familiar project terminology, historical auction figures and references to legitimate creators can make an impersonation campaign appear credible without establishing that a new sale has been authorized.
According to QQL’s official documentation, Mint Passes do not expire. Holders can use them to create official QQL artworks through the project’s established minting process.
That existing functionality does not mean a new public auction has opened. The warning issued by Quit specifically concerned the alleged reopening of public minting, rather than the normal process available to people who already own valid passes.
The reported QQL NFT mint incident highlights the risks collectors face when scammers impersonate artists or project representatives on social media.
Quit said multiple accounts had been created to impersonate Hobbs and promote the supposed sale. However, the warning did not identify the accounts or include screenshots showing the fraudulent messages.
According to the researcher, one person had reportedly lost funds, while another avoided a wallet drain after using Pocket Universe, a security tool designed to help users identify potentially dangerous blockchain interactions.
The precise attack method remains unknown. The available information does not establish whether the affected collector visited a counterfeit website, approved a malicious smart contract or signed a deceptive transaction.
Nevertheless, the reported incident follows a pattern previously identified by US law enforcement authorities.
In an August 2023 advisory, the Federal Bureau of Investigation warned that criminals impersonate NFT developers and project representatives to promote fraudulent releases and steal cryptocurrency. Attackers may create social media accounts resembling legitimate profiles or compromise existing accounts belonging to developers.
The FBI also warned that fraudulent promotions can direct users to counterfeit websites designed to resemble official NFT project pages. Once visitors connect their wallets, they may be prompted to authorize transactions that give malicious smart contracts permission to access their digital assets.
Such permissions can have consequences beyond the initial interaction. Depending on the authorization granted, a malicious contract may be able to transfer tokens or other assets without the wallet owner’s full understanding of what the transaction permits.
Similar risks have appeared in other cryptocurrency security incidents. On October 5, researchers at Salus identified malicious USDG approvals associated with Revenue, reporting that attackers obtained spending permissions before transferring funds from affected wallets.
The security firm said the approvals and transfers occurred within the same transaction, allowing the attackers to move funds immediately after obtaining authorization. It also observed that the funds were divided between two addresses in a pattern resembling an established wallet-drainer service model, although it did not confirm that the same infrastructure was involved in the QQL case.
These incidents illustrate why collectors should not assume that a transaction is safe simply because it appears to be part of an NFT mint, token claim or account verification process.
Some wallet approvals can remain active until revoked, potentially allowing a contract to transfer assets after the original interaction. Users should therefore review transaction details carefully and periodically check whether previously granted permissions remain necessary.
Collectors seeking to participate in a legitimate QQL NFT mint should rely on the project’s established documentation and verified resources rather than links circulated by unfamiliar social media accounts.
QQL’s official Mint Pass guide identifies the Ethereum contract address for the collection as:
0xc73B17179Bf0C59cD5860Bb25247D1D1092c1088 Users can compare this address with the collection’s verified information on Etherscan. They should also access the project’s official website and documentation directly, rather than relying on links posted by accounts claiming that a new sale has begun.
The contract address is an important verification point when purchasing a pass on a secondary marketplace. However, checking an address alone does not make every transaction safe. Collectors should also confirm that they are interacting with the intended website and understand the permissions requested by their wallets.
QQL’s documentation explains that a Mint Pass gives its holder the right to turn one selected output from the project’s generative algorithm into an official NFT. Once the artwork is minted, the pass is burned, and the resulting NFT becomes part of the permanent collection.
This process differs from purchasing an already minted NFT on a secondary marketplace. Buyers should understand whether they are acquiring an unused pass, purchasing an existing artwork or interacting with a contract that claims to offer a new mint.
Hobbs has previously explained that QQL allows collectors to choose which generated artworks become permanent pieces in the collection. The project was designed to let pass holders select their preferred outputs over an extended period, rather than requiring everyone to mint immediately after the original auction.
That flexibility remains distinct from the alleged public sale promoted by the impersonators. Existing holders can continue using valid passes through the established process, but the October 20 warning provides no evidence that a new public auction has been authorized.
For collectors, the central precaution is to verify announcements independently before connecting a wallet or signing a transaction. An account displaying an artist’s name or profile image does not, by itself, establish that the account is authentic.
The reported QQL NFT mint scam also demonstrates how historical project details can be repurposed to lend credibility to a fraudulent offer. Matching the original auction’s 900-pass supply and 50 ETH starting price may make the promotion appear familiar, but those figures are not evidence of a legitimate reopening.
Until the project confirms otherwise through its established channels, collectors should treat claims of a newly reopened public mint with caution and avoid interacting with accounts promoting the unverified offering.
Copyright © 2025 - The Bit Gazette.
