Revolut Reports Former Employee to Police Over Crypto Blackmail Attempt

3 min read

What Does the Allegation Involve?

A cryptocurrency trader says a former Revolut employee attempted to extort him by threatening to publish his personal information unless he paid a ransom. The allegation, made publicly on X by a trader known as TraderSZ, has prompted Revolut to notify law enforcement.

In a Thursday post, TraderSZ wrote that the former employee threatened to disclose his identity and private details and contacted members of his family. According to the trader, relatives who also used Revolut received messages pressuring them to persuade him to pay.

“They looked up my details and found any other family member using Revolut and contacted them to force to pay up or be blackmailed,” TraderSZ wrote.

The trader shared screenshots that he said showed exchanges with Revolut’s customer support regarding the incident. Requests for further comment, including what specific data may have been accessed and whether a formal complaint was filed, were not immediately answered.

Investor Takeaway

Allegations involving insider data access can carry reputational and regulatory risk for fintech platforms, even when companies state that core systems were not breached.

How Has Revolut Responded?

Revolut confirmed that it reported the matter to authorities and that an investigation is under way. A company spokesperson described the conduct as criminal and attributed it to a former employee rather than an internal systems failure.

“This matter relates to the unlawful and criminal actions of a third party, who is a former employee,” the spokesperson said. “Following a review of the incident, we have confirmed that Revolut’s security systems and data protection protocols operated as intended and there was no procedural breach.”

The company added that it is in communication with the affected customer. Revolut did not disclose further details about the individual involved or whether any internal disciplinary or legal steps were taken prior to the law enforcement referral.

This comes at a time when fintech platforms are under closer scrutiny over data governance, especially where crypto users are involved. Even if no system compromise occurred, allegations of insider misuse can raise questions about access controls and monitoring processes.

Why Are Crypto Users Increasingly Targeted?

The case unfolds against a backdrop of rising ransom schemes and physical threats directed at cryptocurrency holders. Digital asset investors are often perceived as holding portable, high-value assets that can be transferred quickly, making them attractive targets for both online extortion and offline coercion.

In February, French authorities arrested six people in connection with a kidnapping and cryptocurrency-linked ransom plot involving the partner of a crypto entrepreneur. Over the course of 2025, French officials charged 25 suspects in cases tied to kidnappings, attempted kidnappings, and ransom demands.

Data from cybersecurity firm CertiK showed that so-called “wrench attacks” — physical assaults aimed at forcing victims to hand over private keys or transfer crypto — rose 75% in 2025, reaching 72 verified cases globally. The figures highlight a broader trend in which digital-asset wealth can spill into real-world security risks.

Investor Takeaway

Crypto investors face a growing blend of cyber and physical threats, making operational security and discretion as important as platform-level safeguards.

What Are the Broader Implications for Fintech?

Revolut, valued at $75 billion as of November 2025, serves more than 65 million global users and ranks among the most downloaded financial services apps in Western Europe. Its scale means that incidents involving customer data, even if isolated, can attract regulatory and public attention.

For fintech companies offering crypto-related services, insider access controls are as critical as external cybersecurity defenses. The Revolut case illustrates how reputational exposure can arise not from a system breach, but from alleged misuse by an individual with prior access.