China Business Journal warned on July 30 that fraudsters had impersonated the publication while demanding Bitcoin from companies threatened with negative news coverage.
Summary
- China Business Journal says scammers demanded Bitcoin while impersonating reporters and threatening targeted companies online.
- The newspaper says the Proton Mail messages were unauthorized and appeared to constitute fraudulent activity.
- No Bitcoin address, payment amount or confirmed victim loss was publicly disclosed in Thursday’s statement.
According to the newspaper’s statement, the scammers contacted businesses through an address hosted by Proton Mail. They claimed that undercover investigations had uncovered damaging information about the targeted companies.
The senders allegedly threatened to publish the purported findings unless the companies transferred Bitcoin. The publication said it had not authorized the messages and considered the operation a suspected fraud scheme.
Scammers allegedly used negative coverage as leverage
The emails appeared to combine two established fraud methods: impersonating a recognized organization and threatening reputational damage to force payment.
China Business Journal said the perpetrators presented themselves as representatives of the newspaper. They then offered to suppress the alleged investigation in exchange for Bitcoin. The publication did not reproduce the full emails or identify the businesses contacted.
The allegation remains based on the newspaper’s account. No suspect has been named, and no law enforcement agency had publicly announced an arrest or criminal filing connected to the emails as of July 30.
Chinese authorities have previously prosecuted people who impersonated journalists or used negative coverage to demand money. In a 2025 case published by China’s news regulator, three people were convicted after using purported environmental reporting to extort 16 companies.
China Business Journal says the emails were unauthorized
The newspaper said the messages did not come from its authorized reporting or business operations. It is collecting evidence and reserved the right to pursue civil and criminal action against those responsible.
The warning is intended to help companies distinguish genuine reporting inquiries from payment demands. A legitimate request for comment may contain difficult questions, but demands for cryptocurrency in exchange for suppressing publication are a clear warning sign.
China Business Journal was established in 1985. It operates under the supervision of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and is organized by the academy’s Institute of Industrial Economics.
The scammers’ use of the publication’s identity could therefore make the emails appear credible to executives unfamiliar with its official contact procedures.
The newspaper did not disclose a Bitcoin wallet address, requested amount, transaction hash or payment deadline. It also did not say whether any targeted company transferred funds.
Without a wallet address, independent researchers cannot examine the blockchain for payments linked to the alleged scheme. The available information confirms the warning, but not whether the fraudsters successfully collected Bitcoin.
The use of Proton Mail does not establish who sent the emails. Proton allows users to report suspected phishing and abusive messages to its security team. Its guidance asks recipients to preserve and submit the original message when reporting suspicious activity.
The newspaper also did not announce whether it had contacted Proton or Chinese police. Any account suspension, identification request or criminal investigation would require further action by the relevant service provider and authorities.
Companies face a familiar impersonation tactic
China’s internet regulator has previously warned that criminals sometimes pose as legitimate news organizations, threaten to publish negative material and demand payment from companies or individuals.
The latest case adds Bitcoin to that model. Cryptocurrency allows a recipient to request direct payment without using a conventional company bank account. However, the demand itself does not prove that the scammers received funds or successfully concealed their identities.
U.S. prosecutors charged a teenager over an alleged $8 million crypto ransom scheme tied to corporate intrusions and impersonation tactics.
Additionally, Coinbase refused a $20 million ransom demand after attackers claimed they possessed stolen customer information.
China Business Journal said it would continue gathering evidence. The next verified update could come from the newspaper, Proton, police authorities or a company that received one of the emails.
