The wallets linked to the CYBERLEEK memecoin have moved around $350,000 (roughly Rs. 3.3 crore) raised via liquidity provider fees following the emergence of the unauthorised GTA VI clips, which brought some limelight to the coin, said on-chain researcher Conor Grogan. On September 1, Grogan stated that the funds had flowed through many over-the-counter service providers. These wallets belonged to the individual or entity behind the GTA VI leaks, but their controller remains unknown. The analyst explained that all the money was derived purely from the liquidity fees, not a large CYBERLEEK allocation by the operator itself.
Blockchain Data Does Not Establish Identity Of Wallet Controller
The GTA 6 hacker, responsible for the Cyberleek coin, has cashed out about $350k, entirely from LP fees. They have washed funds through a variety of OTC providers
This is the first hacker that I’ve ever seen make money solely on liquidity provision (versus dumping a token) https://t.co/5czgluVKBn pic.twitter.com/ABzjSjYAed
— Conor (@jconorgrogan) September 1, 2026
The parent company of GTA VI developers, Take-Two Interactive, has issued subpoenas through the federal courts to locate the accounts responsible for the leak of the material. The CYBERLEEK protocol was launched on Solana on August 15, as per the publicly reported blockchain data. The project has gained fame from the CyberLeek accounts that posted unreleased footage of GTA VI on social media. In decentralised exchanges, liquidity providers offer token pairs for the liquidity pool. Traders then use the pool to trade an asset by paying transaction fees, which go to the liquidity providers.Â
According to Grogan, CYBERLEEK’s owner earned money due to this design. Every time unlicensed data about GTA VI was released, it drew some interest, but at the same time, the transactions of tokens generated more money for the wallet that provided liquidity. The liquidity mining process did not involve the operator having to liquidate most of the liquidity tokens. On the other hand, the wallet would continue earning fees as people kept trading CYBERLEEK.Â
For the first time, Grogan had viewed this setup where someone was making money purely out of the liquidity process and not through dumping of tokens. This is an observation of his own based on the activities in the wallet, not a finding by a court or law enforcement agency. On-chain information may include transfers of funds, liquidity, and fee withdrawals. On-chain data cannot independently prove who controlled the wallet or whether the same person downloaded and distributed the copyrighted files of Rockstar.
The identity of the individual/group behind CyberLeek remains unknown. There is no court document, police statement, or Rockstar announcement that links any named individual with the wallets analysed by Grogan. The designation of the controller as the GTA VI hacker would be an inference which goes beyond the existing facts. The facts indicate that the CyberLeek alias leaked the video and created the token bearing that name.
