None of the protocols in our sources has published a number of wallets you are allowed to run. What they have published is how they decide that several wallets belong to one person, and that is the line you can cross. Two wallets can be one too many. Ten can pass.

This matters every time a snapshot closes and an eligibility list goes up. Each wallet is either counted on its own, folded into a cluster that shares one allocation, or struck off as a sybil. The question that decides which is not how many addresses you hold. It is what those addresses did that points back to you.

How a filter decides several wallets are one person

The most detailed account any protocol has given comes from Wormhole's own write-up, built with the analytics firm Allium. Wormhole did not set a per-person wallet limit. It built an "ownership graph" that gives one user ID to every cluster of wallets it believes one person controls. That graph covered more than 30 chains and more than three years of history, and the final dataset ran to over 400,000 wallets. Rewards were then spread across the whole cluster rather than paid per wallet.

Two signals did most of the linking. The first was the source of funds: wallets seeded from a single exchange withdrawal or a common seed wallet. The second was behavior: rapid, sequential transactions of identical token amounts across chains. Wormhole says the work saved it upwards of $100 million.

Some projects also look at what happens before anything reaches the chain. A post on Paragraph sets out the frontend data a claim page or faucet can log: IP address, RPC endpoint, browser fingerprint, timezone and screen size. That source is a farming blog, not a protocol, so treat it as a description of what is possible rather than proof that any given project does it.

The best argument on the other side is that all of this can be beaten with enough separation. Coronium, which sells mobile proxies to farmers, puts the sybil survival rate for dedicated mobile proxies at 85 to 95%. That figure comes from the seller of the product. On its own numbers, a 500-wallet farm costs $29,000 to $66,000 a month to run. That is a business with its own risks, and nothing to do with a reader who keeps three wallets.

Three purges worth recognizing

LayerZero, June 2024. About 803,000 wallets were removed before the ZRO distribution. The Defiant reported 803,273 removed and 1.28 million eligible. Sources disagree on the share: some give 59% of applicants and Coronium gives about 38% of 2.1 million. LayerZero also ran a self-report program, so suspected farmers could disclose their clusters and take a reduced allocation instead of nothing.

Linea, December 9, 2025. Roughly 800,000 wallets were filtered out, and about 749,000 claimants were left.

Fabric Protocol's ROBO, February 2026. This is the cautionary case, because the protocol's filter counted the wrong thing. Bitquery's investigation quotes Fabric as saying its screening "had used location checks and a one-device limit." One operator still used 11,204 claim wallets to take 87% of the claimed tokens. The tells were in the funding and timing. All 480 funding wallets were seeded from seven exchanges in a 54-hour window, January 10 to 12, and claims hopped through intermediary wallets about 12 seconds apart. A device limit missed every one of those patterns.

The same shape appears in the aPriori case. AirdropAlert reports that one entity controlled about 14,000 wallets that were created and funded in synchronized batches.

Not a device count

The common worry is that holding several farming addresses on one hardware wallet marks them as yours. A hardware wallet signs transactions. It does not publish which addresses share its seed, so those addresses are linked only by what they do on-chain and by whatever your browser and network expose when you connect. ROBO shows the reverse case too: a strict one-device rule did nothing against a farm that kept its funding and timing patterns consistent.

What the published filters linked on What does not link wallets by itself
One exchange withdrawal or seed wallet funding them all Several addresses derived from one hardware wallet
Transfers back and forth between the wallets Owning more than one wallet
Identical amounts in rapid sequence Using the same protocols as other users
Batches created and funded together A wallet count below some rumored number

What to change before the next snapshot

Stop asking how many wallets you can run. Ask whether anyone could draw a line between them. In practice that means four things:

  • Fund each wallet separately, never all from one withdrawal.
  • Don't shuttle tokens or gas between your farming wallets.
  • Don't run the same task list, in the same order, with the same amounts, minutes apart.
  • Assume a cluster gets paid once.

On Wormhole's design, a cluster is shared one allocation. A cluster that looks like a farm, as at LayerZero, can get nothing. AirdropAlert's Morten Christensen puts the practical answer in one line: "Build one strong wallet instead of twenty weak ones."

The rules also change every season, and enforcement can come after you've claimed. Wormhole re-examined eligibility after its first snapshot. Binance said on October 20, 2025 that it had banned more than 600 Alpha accounts and could claw back airdrops already paid. Nothing that passed one campaign's filter is guaranteed to pass the next.

Keep the bulk of your funds out of all of this. The vault-and-burner setup in our hardware wallet for airdrops guide covers that. When a list does go up, check it without exposing the vault, and know why checkers disagree before you trust one.