Question 1

I only have a wallet address, no transaction hash. Is that enough?

Accepted Answer

Usually yes. From an address we can identify incoming and outgoing transactions and work out which one is yours using the amount and approximate date. A hash makes the anchoring step faster and cleaner, but its absence rarely prevents a trace. What matters more is that the address is correct, one wrong character produces a valid but unrelated address.

Question 2

The scammer used Tether on Tron. Does that change anything?

Accepted Answer

It changes the tooling, not the principle. USDT on Tron is one of the most common rails in current fraud because fees are low and transfers are fast. It is fully traceable, and Tether has frozen addresses in response to properly documented law-enforcement requests, which makes a well-structured report particularly valuable in these cases.

Question 3

My funds went through a mixer. Should I bother?

Accepted Answer

Often, yes, but ask us first. Many operators use mixers badly: they deposit and withdraw in recognisable amounts, reuse timing patterns or send output straight to an address already in their cluster. Where that happens the link survives. Where it genuinely does not, we tell you at triage instead of charging you for a report that concludes nothing.

Question 4

Can you tell me the scammer’s name?

Accepted Answer

Sometimes, and only with corroboration. On-chain data alone never contains a name. Names emerge when the chain analysis connects to something else, a reused email in a registration record, a deposit address tied to a KYC account, a corporate filing behind the platform. When we can name someone, we set out exactly how the identification was made and how confident we are. When we cannot, we say so.