Recently, someone asked me again: How much can you trust the address profiling and tag clustering you do? I usually start by pouring cold water—It can help narrow down the scope, but don’t treat it as a verdict. On-chain fund flows look very “objective,” but in fact, many are fake moves: splitting, consolidating, proxy payments, circling the same router… The “same group of people” you see might just be using the same set of tools.

When it comes to cross-chain bridge thefts, tags fly everywhere after the incident, everyone is eager to jump to conclusions. I actually prefer to let the bullets fly for a while. And that time with the oracle’s abnormal quotes, everyone in the group was shouting “wait for confirmation,” basically meaning don’t rush to judge the address, first see if there’s ongoing activity or new related edges.

Forget it, to put it plainly: tags can be trusted about 60-70%, good for risk screening; if you really want to hold someone accountable or make a definitive judgment, you need to look at authorization, signature records, interaction contracts, and fund flows together. Otherwise, it’s easy to wrongfully accuse good people or let the real culprits go.