Cyberleek may have just cashed out on their GTA 6 leak, earning over $200,000 in the most predictable crypto rugpull ever performed
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
Cyberleek, the anonymous account associated with alleged Grand Theft Auto 6 leaks, reportedly withdrew more than $200,000 from the $CYBERLEEK cryptocurrency after promoting it alongside the footage. The withdrawals have intensified claims that the token was a rugpull, using attention around GTA 6 to attract trading before money was removed.
A GTAForums investigator’s blockchain analysis estimated that Cyberleek generated roughly $270,000 in transaction fees after burning 270 million reserved tokens, apparently to build confidence in the coin. About $99,000 was reportedly sent to KuCoin, $84,000 to CCE.Cash and roughly $91,000 remained in wallets; after estimated setup costs of $29,000, the alleged profit was around $241,000. These figures rely on public blockchain data and have not been independently verified.
- GTA 6 leak-linked crypto promoter reportedly withdrew over $200,000.
- Blockchain analysis suggests an alleged profit of about $241,000.
- The reported figures have not been independently verified.
New here? Start with this
Grand Theft Auto is a hugely popular series of crime-themed video games made by Rockstar Games. Interest in its next instalment, GTA 6, has made any claimed footage or information about the game especially valuable online.
Cryptocurrencies are digital tokens that can be bought and sold, often with prices driven by attention and speculation. A “rugpull” is a term used when people behind a token are accused of promoting it to attract buyers before withdrawing funds or selling their holdings, leaving others exposed to losses.
Blockchain records can show movements of cryptocurrency between public wallet addresses, but they do not always establish who controls them or why transfers were made. Claims about the person known as Cyberleek and the $CYBERLEEK token are based on such analysis and remain unconfirmed.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The reported token design, large fee claims and movement of funds to exchanges support the concern that the leak was used to stimulate speculative trading before insiders extracted value. Advocates of this view would argue that burning reserved tokens may have been a calculated way to build trust, while the subsequent 75% fall in market value left ordinary holders carrying most of the risk. They see transparency and investor protection as especially important where anonymous promoters combine sensational leaks with a tradable asset.
The case against
The available figures, wallet attributions and motives have not been independently confirmed, so a cash-out alone does not establish that the footage campaign was conceived as a rugpull. A supporter of Cyberleek’s account could argue that the token funded or amplified a real dispute over gaming rights, and that selling tokens or receiving transaction fees is not inherently deceptive if the risks and ownership structure were visible on-chain. They would stress due process, the limits of blockchain inference and the need to distinguish sharp speculation from provable fraud.
Full account
Reports say that CyberLeek, the name used by the party behind recent alleged Grand Theft Auto VI leaks, may have withdrawn roughly $270,000 from a cryptocurrency project promoted alongside the clips. The withdrawals were reported on 27 August, shortly before Rockstar Games released GTA VI footage through its own presentation. The activity has prompted claims that the leaks and token promotion were linked to a planned attempt to profit from public interest in the game.
The leaked videos reportedly carried references to a CyberLeek meme coin and directed viewers to a website where token holders could vote on material to be released next. That arrangement appeared to turn attention around the leaks into demand for the token, while the clips ranged from broad gameplay material to scenes described as containing greater story detail. The reports do not establish the identity or number of people behind CyberLeek.
Crypto analyst Vice Cit, cited in the second report, said that funds had been moved through four transactions to three wallets. The analyst suggested this could indicate the involvement of at least two people, although that remains an inference rather than a confirmed finding. Vice Cit also estimated that the token’s market capitalisation had fallen sharply after the first leak, from an alleged peak of $23.39 million to about $3.85 million at the time of the comments.
The timing has led to speculation that those operating the scheme chose to sell as interest in further leaks weakened following Rockstar’s official footage release. Vice Cit estimated that, after initial setup costs of around $29,000, the operation could have generated approximately $241,000 in profit if the withdrawals marked its end. Those figures, the nature of the transactions, and the alleged connection between the leaks and the token depend on blockchain analysis and reporting rather than confirmation from Rockstar or identified CyberLeek operators.
Where outlets differ
The PC Gamer material is presented primarily through its headline, which characterises the episode as a likely crypto ‘rug pull’ and places the earnings at more than $200,000. The second report supplies the underlying detail: an estimated $270,000 withdrawn, four transactions, three recipient wallets, the token’s reported fall in market value, and Vice Cit’s estimate of around $241,000 net profit. It also gives greater emphasis to possible motives and timing, while treating the number of operators as uncertain.