AI agents are starting to make purchases on behalf of people. So here’s a question for payment providers and merchants: How do you assess risk when there’s no human clicking, typing or browsing at checkout? Autonomous agents change the signals a checkout can see. We believe verifying an agent’s identity is only part of the answer. You also need to understand how the agent behaves and the behaviour of the operator…

Channel
ChainAware Announcements
@ChainAwareNews
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
10,336subscribers
-251 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1002367234605 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ChainAwareNews |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 56 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ChainAwareNews |
Topic
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 96% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Nov 2026, 11:41 | 10,336 | -1 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 17:15 | 10,337 | -3 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 09:15 | 10,340 | -1 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 02:17 | 10,341 | -1 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 23:35 | 10,342 | -1 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 22:16 | 10,343 | -3 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 23:47 | 10,346 | -3 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 18:38 | 10,349 | -1 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 21:31 | 10,350 | -3 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 01:50 | 10,353 | -1 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 23:15 | 10,354 | -1 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 23:06 | 10,355 | -1 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 01:26 | 10,356 | -2 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 05:01 | 10,358 | -4 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 05:50 | 10,362 | -2 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 23:48 | 10,364 | -1 |
| 19 Oct 2026, 21:27 | 10,365 | -2 |
| 17 Oct 2026, 18:39 | 10,367 | -1 |
| 16 Oct 2026, 16:31 | 10,368 | -2 |
| 15 Oct 2026, 14:19 | 10,370 | first reading |
Engagement
62 posts held, back to 20 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 55 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 0.283%
- avg views ÷ 10,336 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 29.3
- 30 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 23.1%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 30
- of 62 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 5 of 30 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 62 (20 July 2026 – 10 November 2026) |
| Views total | 879 |
| Reactions total | 46 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 11 Nov 2026, 10:33 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Reaction mix
234 reactions across 11 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 20.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 48 | 20.5% | |
| 🎉 | 47 | 20.1% | |
| ❤ | 42 | 17.9% | |
| 👍 | 37 | 15.8% | |
| 👏 | 31 | 13.2% | |
| 🥰 | 11 | 4.70% | |
| 💯 | 10 | 4.27% | |
| 😍 | 8 | 3.42% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 15 of the 62 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 234 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 62 most recent posts we hold, published 20 July 2026 to 10 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 2 of 30 posts held from the last 30 days (6.67%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
More AI agents are joining the ecosystem, but registration numbers only tell us part of the story. Who controls these agents? Where does their funding come from? What does the owner’s on-chain history look like? These are some of the signals we look at when assessing agent trust. Because giving an agent an identity is one thing. Understanding the behaviour behind it is another. Our latest ERC-8004 tracker 👇 https…
We’ve been tracking rug pull activity week by week, and the latest numbers are worth looking at. $43.4M extracted in Week 42. $52.1M in Week 43. $50.7M in Week 44. The four-week stretch above $62M has ended, but we’re still seeing tens of millions extracted every week. The cumulative total has now reached $1.39B in 2026. Here are the latest reports 👇 https://chainaware.ai/blog/topics/news/ #DeFi #CryptoSecurity …
We talk a lot about AI agents and what they can do. But here’s something worth thinking about: how much do we actually know about the people or wallets behind these agents? An agent can have a registered identity, but that doesn’t automatically make it trustworthy. When we scored 274,792 registered agents, more than half landed in the Elevated Risk or Untrusted tiers. That’s why the behavioural side of agent trus…
Binance lost $6.3B in 20 minutes. ChainAware flagged the attacker wallet at 97.6% fraud - 37 hours before. Rules-based security was built for human attackers. When the adversary is AI, you have to protect with AI. New article : chainaware.ai/blog/ai-adversary-web2-web3-security 🔗https://x.com/ChainAware/status/2119367622361833859
GM Web3 Founders & Builders! Are you showing users what they actually need, or simply what you want them to see? DeFi users have different histories, interests and intentions. A generic onboarding experience cannot account for all of them. ChainAware helps projects understand wallet behaviour and uses AI Growth Agents to turn those insights into personalised prompts and calls to action. Make every interaction mor…
The Binance hacker deposited $60M stolen USDT into @Aave . Aave is permissionless - it couldn’t know. But the UI could. Integrating Transaction Monitoring at the frontend layer would flag that wallet before the deposit lands - 97%+ fraud score, connected to a $6.3B hack. Aave stays permissionless at protocol level. The UI protects users and Aave from money laundering exposure. That’s the integration DeFi frontend…
What if a wallet you're about to interact with is linked to a major crypto exploit? Here's what ChainAware Wallet Investigation showed in this report. The address was identified as the Ronin Bridge exploiter, confirmed to belong to the Lazarus Group, with multiple sanctions designations and related addresses mapped in the same cluster. This goes beyond checking whether a wallet is flagged. Wallet Investigation br…
We ran the Binance hacker’s wallet through our AML Investigation tool. One inbound counterparty links back to an address that fed 315 rug pulls... Plus three high fraud inbounds ... https://chainaware.ai/investigation/eth/0x7C8601d4645b93cea45F71e118A729332e6B5CA0 This wallet didn’t appear from nowhere. The criminal network was already there - 37 hours before $6.3B left Binance. Forensics documents. Predictive st…
The Mercado Bitcoin attacker didn’t just steal keys. They prepared for 8 hours first — building a wallet that looked clean. It didn’t fool the model. 90.29% fraud by end of the warming phase — hours before a single dollar was swept. The fix isn’t better key security alone. The fix is verifying where funds go before the transfer is authorized. Enter Transaction Monitoring. #BlockchainSecurity #CryptoFraud #Transac…
🔗https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7524045598803521537
GM Degens! Ever wondered what a wallet has been doing before you interact with it? Who does it transact with? Where do its funds come from? Do funds keep moving between the same group of addresses? Does it have links to known flagged wallets? ChainAware Wallet Investigation brings these findings together in one structured report, covering wallet activity, counterparties, connected clusters, AML exposure and risk a…
Showing the 12 most recent of 62 posts we hold for @ChainAwareNews. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
- Dead references
- 1
- handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
- Evidenced gone
- 0
- we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
- Never seen alive
- 1
- vacant every time we have ever looked
@ChainAwareNews named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
named in 3 posts, 4 November 2026 – 6 November 2026
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 11 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ChainAware Announcements” (@ChainAwareNews), 10,336 subscribers as measured 11 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ChainAwareNews.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.