Bafoofp.net Scam Investigation: Elena Roxana, Busdoot.org and $40,000 Investor Warning

Washington State’s Department of Financial Institutions (DFI) published an official warning on June 1, 2026, identifying bafoofp.net, busdoot.org, and Elena Roxana in a suspected cryptocurrency investment scam involving a reported $40,000 loss.

The case is particularly relevant to Cyb3rsect because the regulator published a specific cryptocurrency receiving address. This allows affected investors to compare their own transaction records against a documented investigative lead.

Importantly, DFI states that the complaint has not been independently verified and that Elena Roxana is likely a fictional identity.

Department of Financial Institutions

Ready-to-publish Cyb3rsect article

Bafoofp.net Scam Investigation: Elena Roxana, Busdoot.org and $40,000 Cryptocurrency Warning

Bafoofp.net, a purported cryptocurrency trading website, has been identified in an official investor warning issued by the Washington State Department of Financial Institutions (DFI).

The warning, published on June 1, 2026, also identifies busdoot.org and a person using the name Elena Roxana.

According to the regulator, a Washington investor believed they were in a romantic relationship with Roxana, who encouraged them to invest in cryptocurrency through bafoofp.net.

The investor reportedly made multiple cryptocurrency deposits to a wallet address associated with the purported trading platform.

After those deposits, the website displayed account balances and transaction confirmations. However, the investor was unable to withdraw the funds.

The individual using the name Elena Roxana subsequently stopped communicating with the investor.

Washington DFI lists a reported loss of $40,000 and classifies the complaint as involving cryptocurrency scams and pig-butchering scams.

The regulator explicitly states that the allegations and reported loss have not been independently verified.

This investigation examines the documented complaint, the role of the alleged romantic relationship, the cryptocurrency wallet address identified by regulators, and the evidence affected investors should preserve.

What Is Bafoofp.net?

Bafoofp.net was presented to the investor as a digital asset trading platform.

According to Washington DFI, the website appeared to offer legitimate cryptocurrency investment services.

However, the investor’s experience raised serious concerns about whether the displayed account activity corresponded to actual assets.

The complaint describes multiple deposits followed by account balances and transaction confirmations that appeared on the platform.

Despite those displayed records, the investor reportedly could not withdraw the money.

This distinction is important.

A cryptocurrency trading dashboard can display balances and transaction records without independently proving that the platform holds the corresponding assets.

An investigation should therefore distinguish the cryptocurrency actually transferred from the balances displayed inside the platform.

Washington DFI’s Official Warning

On June 1, 2026, Washington DFI’s Securities Division published an alert titled Alleged cryptocurrency trading platform https://bafoofp.net may be fraudulent.

The alert identifies three subjects:

• bafoofp.net
• busdoot.org
• Elena Roxana

The regulator reports a $40,000 investor loss.

The complaint describes a suspected relationship-based cryptocurrency investment scheme in which the investor was encouraged to make deposits to an external wallet.

The investor later experienced unsuccessful withdrawals and lost contact with the person who introduced the opportunity.

Washington DFI classifies the case under cryptocurrency scams and pig-butchering scams.

However, the warning is not a criminal conviction, and the regulator has not independently verified the investor’s allegations.

Who Is Elena Roxana?

Elena Roxana is the name associated with the person who reportedly encouraged the investor to use bafoofp.net.

According to Washington DFI, the investor believed they were in a romantic relationship with Roxana.

The regulator states that Roxana is likely a fictional person used by scammers.

That is an important distinction.

The name should not be treated as the verified identity of a real individual responsible for the complaint.

The public alert does not establish Roxana’s legal name, residence, nationality, or professional background.

It also does not identify the communication platform through which the relationship began.

For investigative purposes, the relevant evidence would include the actual messaging accounts, telephone numbers, photographs, profile details, and communications used during the interaction.

An unrelated individual sharing the same name should not be assumed to have any connection to the case.

How the Alleged Romance Investment Scheme Worked

According to the complaint, the investor believed they had developed a romantic relationship with the person using the name Elena Roxana.

Roxana then persuaded the investor to make cryptocurrency investments through bafoofp.net.

This type of reported activity resembles relationship-based investment fraud.

An individual may develop personal trust before introducing a trading opportunity.

The investment may be presented as a way to build financial security or participate in an opportunity supposedly known to the other person.

The investor may then rely on personal assurances rather than independently verifying the trading platform.

Washington DFI categorized the complaint as a pig-butchering scam, a term commonly used for investment fraud involving extended relationship-building and financial manipulation.

However, the public warning does not provide a detailed timeline of the relationship.

It does not establish how long the investor communicated with Roxana or whether any specific romantic promises were made.

Those details should not be invented.

The Role of Busdoot.org

Busdoot.org is named alongside bafoofp.net in the official Washington DFI warning.

However, the regulator provides substantially more detail about bafoofp.net.

The complaint specifically identifies bafoofp.net as the website through which the investor was persuaded to invest.

The public alert does not explain precisely how busdoot.org was used.

It does not establish whether busdoot.org was a second trading platform, a promotional website, a login portal, or another component of the operation.

Therefore, busdoot.org should be described as an additional domain identified in the regulatory complaint.

A technical investigation could examine any saved links, website screenshots, email messages, and account records to determine how the domain was connected to the investor’s experience.

It would be inappropriate to claim that both domains had identical functions or were operated by the same person without supporting evidence.

The Reported $40,000 Loss

Washington DFI lists a reported financial loss of $40,000.

The investor allegedly made multiple cryptocurrency deposits rather than a single payment.

The public warning does not provide a complete transaction-by-transaction breakdown of those deposits.

It also does not identify the precise dates, cryptocurrencies, or exchanges used for every transfer.

The reported amount should therefore be treated as a complaint figure, not an independently audited financial finding.

A case-specific financial reconstruction would require the original payment records.

These may include exchange withdrawal confirmations, wallet histories, bank statements, transaction hashes, and receiving addresses.

The objective would be to establish how much cryptocurrency was actually transferred and when each payment occurred.

The Cryptocurrency Wallet Address Identified by Washington DFI

One of the most important details in this case is the receiving address published in the official warning.

Reported receiving wallet address:

0x92f2ca109caF61aCa00f120326A8688F43f86fCD

Washington DFI states that the investor transferred cryptocurrency to this address.

The address follows the format used by Ethereum and several other EVM-compatible blockchain networks.

However, the address format alone does not establish which blockchain network was used for the investor’s transfers.

That must be confirmed using the original transaction records.

The public warning does not identify the person controlling the address or provide a completed analysis of subsequent transfers.

The address should therefore be treated as an investigative lead, not proof that a particular individual owns the wallet.

How Blockchain Forensics Could Examine the Address

A blockchain investigation could begin by comparing the address published by Washington DFI with the investor’s original withdrawal records.

The investigator would first establish which blockchain network was used.

Relevant transaction hashes could then be examined to verify the amounts and dates of the transfers.

Depending on the network and available records, subsequent movements may provide additional investigative leads.

For example, transactions may show transfers to other addresses, smart contracts, or custodial services.

However, public blockchain records do not automatically reveal the identities of wallet controllers.

Some destinations may require additional records held by financial institutions or cryptocurrency exchanges.

The DFI warning does not establish that the reported $40,000 has already been traced to a particular exchange or person.

It would therefore be misleading to claim that the funds have been located or are available for recovery.

Why Displayed Account Balances Are Not Proof of Profits

According to Washington DFI, the investor saw account balances and transaction confirmations on bafoofp.net after making deposits.

Those displays may have created the impression that the cryptocurrency was being traded or held in a functioning investment account.

However, an account dashboard is only one source of information.

It does not independently verify the existence of underlying assets.

A suspicious platform may display figures that cannot be reconciled with actual financial transactions.

For that reason, an investigation should compare the investor’s confirmed deposits with the platform’s displayed balance and any completed withdrawals.

In the bafoofp.net complaint, the investor reportedly could not withdraw the funds.

The regulator does not verify the account balances or any profits displayed by the website.

What Happened When the Investor Tried to Withdraw?

Washington DFI reports that the investor was unable to withdraw funds from bafoofp.net.

The public warning does not specify the reason given by the platform for the withdrawal problem.

It does not describe a particular tax demand, unlocking fee, security deposit, or account verification payment.

Those details should not be added without evidence.

The documented complaint is that the investor made cryptocurrency deposits, saw account balances and transaction confirmations, and subsequently could not access the money.

The inability to withdraw is a serious warning sign when the investor cannot independently verify the platform’s custody arrangements or trading activity.

Elena Roxana Stopped Communicating

According to Washington DFI, the person using the name Elena Roxana eventually stopped communicating with the investor.

This is an important part of the reported sequence.

The investor was allegedly persuaded to invest through a personal relationship.

After the funds became inaccessible, the individual who introduced the opportunity was no longer available.

A sudden loss of contact may make it more difficult to obtain explanations, identify the person involved, or preserve communications.

However, the public warning does not establish exactly when communication stopped or whether the individual gave any explanation.

An affected investor should preserve the complete conversation history, including the last messages received and any associated profile information.

Why This Case Resembles Pig-Butchering Fraud

The Washington DFI scam tracker categorizes the case as a pig-butchering scam.

This term generally refers to a form of investment fraud in which a person builds trust with a prospective investor before encouraging increasingly significant financial transfers.

The trust-building stage may involve romantic, social, or professional interactions.

The investment stage may involve a purported cryptocurrency trading platform displaying account balances or profits.

The investor may later discover that funds cannot be withdrawn.

In the bafoofp.net complaint, the reported romantic relationship, cryptocurrency deposits, displayed account activity, unsuccessful withdrawals, and disappearance of the contact are consistent with several elements of this pattern.

However, the available warning does not establish every detail of a typical pig-butchering scheme.

The article should remain grounded in the events the regulator actually reported.

Is Bafoofp.net Legitimate or a Scam?

The available regulatory information raises substantial concerns.

Washington DFI has published an official warning identifying bafoofp.net, busdoot.org, and Elena Roxana.

The complaint describes an investor who was persuaded to transfer cryptocurrency through an apparent romantic relationship.

The investor reportedly deposited funds to an external wallet, saw account balances and transaction confirmations, and could not withdraw the money.

The individual using the name Elena Roxana subsequently stopped communicating.

Washington DFI recorded a reported loss of $40,000.

However, the regulator has not independently verified the allegations or reported financial loss.

The evidence-based conclusion is that bafoofp.net is the subject of a documented regulatory warning involving suspected cryptocurrency investment fraud.

The warning does not establish a final criminal judgment against an identified individual.

What Evidence Should Bafoofp.net Investors Preserve?

Anyone who invested through bafoofp.net or encountered busdoot.org should preserve the original records.

Important evidence includes:

• Communications with the person using the name Elena Roxana
• Dating or social media profile information, if applicable
• Messaging account identifiers and telephone numbers
• Links to bafoofp.net and busdoot.org
• Account registration emails and login details
• Screenshots of displayed balances
• Transaction confirmations shown on the platform
• Original cryptocurrency exchange withdrawal records
• Blockchain transaction hashes
• Receiving wallet addresses
• Bank records associated with cryptocurrency purchases
• Withdrawal requests and customer support messages
• Saved copies of relevant webpages

Where possible, preserve complete message exports and original transaction records.

Do not share private keys, wallet recovery phrases, passwords, or authentication codes with anyone offering investigative or recovery services.

What to Do If You Lost Money Through Bafoofp.net

If you transferred cryptocurrency to bafoofp.net and cannot withdraw the funds, avoid sending additional money based solely on promises that the account will be unlocked.

Preserve your financial records and communications.

Contact any cryptocurrency exchange or financial institution involved in the transfers to report suspected fraud and ask what protective procedures may be available.

If you provided sensitive account information, review the security of your email, financial accounts, and cryptocurrency wallets.

Report the incident to the appropriate regulator or law-enforcement agency.

U.S. residents can report internet-enabled investment fraud to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center.

Washington residents can also submit complaints to Washington DFI.

Be cautious of anyone who subsequently claims that the cryptocurrency has been recovered and demands an upfront payment to release it.

Can Cryptocurrency Sent to Bafoofp.net Be Recovered?

Recovery depends on the actual transaction history and the circumstances of the case.

Cryptocurrency transfers recorded on public blockchains may be traceable.

However, tracing a transfer does not reverse it.

An investigation may identify additional addresses or connections to custodial services, but those findings do not guarantee that assets can be returned.

Because Washington DFI published a receiving address, affected investors can compare that address against their own records.

However, the regulator does not establish that the reported funds remain at that address or are available for recovery.

No responsible investigator should guarantee recovery based solely on a wallet address or a screenshot of an investment account.

How Cyb3rsect Can Assist With a Bafoofp.net Investigation

Cyb3rsect provides digital-investigation and blockchain-forensics services relevant to suspected cryptocurrency investment fraud.

For a bafoofp.net-related case, an evidence review may begin with the investor’s original communications, payment confirmations, and account screenshots.

The objective is to reconstruct the timeline of the relationship, investment solicitations, deposits, and withdrawal attempts.

Where transaction hashes and wallet addresses are available, relevant blockchain activity may be examined for additional investigative leads.

The address published by Washington DFI may be useful when comparing the investor’s payment records.

Any analysis should distinguish verified transactions from unsubstantiated claims about account balances, profits, or the identity of the person using the name Elena Roxana.

A forensic investigation may assist with evidence documentation and reporting, but it cannot guarantee financial recovery.

Contact Cyb3rsect About Bafoofp.net

If you invested through bafoofp.net, encountered busdoot.org, or communicated with someone using the name Elena Roxana, preserve your original records.

Cyb3rsect can assess the available digital evidence and determine whether further examination may be appropriate.

Useful starting information includes cryptocurrency transaction hashes, receiving addresses, exchange withdrawal records, account screenshots, and communication histories.

Never provide passwords, private keys, or wallet recovery phrases.

Contact Cyb3rsect to discuss an evidence-based review of a suspected cryptocurrency investment incident.

Final Assessment

The June 1, 2026 Washington DFI warning identifies bafoofp.net, busdoot.org, and Elena Roxana in a complaint involving suspected relationship-based cryptocurrency investment fraud.

The investor reportedly believed they were in a romantic relationship with Roxana and was persuaded to make cryptocurrency deposits through bafoofp.net.

The platform displayed account balances and transaction confirmations, but the investor could not withdraw the funds.

Roxana subsequently stopped communicating.

Washington DFI lists a reported loss of $40,000 and identifies a specific cryptocurrency receiving address associated with the complaint.

The regulator has not independently verified the allegations or reported loss.

Nevertheless, the case illustrates the risks of unverified cryptocurrency trading platforms, investment solicitations through personal relationships, and account balances that cannot be withdrawn.

For affected investors, preserving original messages and blockchain transaction records is the essential first step toward understanding what happened.

Official Source

Washington State Department of Financial Institutions — Alleged cryptocurrency trading platform https://bafoofp.net may be fraudulent, June 1, 2026.

https://dfi.wa.gov/alerts/alleged-cryptocurrency-trading-platform-httpsbafoofpnet-may-be-fraudulent

Editorial notice: This article summarizes public regulatory information. It does not claim that Cyb3rsect independently verified the reported loss, identified the person using the name Elena Roxana, established the relationship between the two domains, or traced the investor’s cryptocurrency transfers.