Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

how it happened, and what it means for DeFi

Published

on

how it happened, and what it means for DeFi

A roughly $292 million exploit over the weekend has rattled the crypto industry, exposing vulnerabilities in decentralized finance (DeFi) infrastructure and raising concerns about knock-on effects across lending protocols.

While investigations are still ongoing, early analysis suggests the attack centered on Kelp’s rsETH token — a yield-bearing version of ether (ETH) — and the mechanism used to move assets between blockchains.

The attacker appears to have manipulated that system to create large amounts of tokens without proper backing, then quickly used them as collateral to borrow and drain real assets from lending markets, mostly from Aave , the largest decentralized crypto lender.

The incident is the latest blow to DeFi, happening only a couple weeks after the $285 million exploit of Solana-based protocol Drift, further denting investor trust in the nearly $90 billion crypto sector.

Advertisement

How the attack worked

At a high level, the exploit targeted a LayerZero bridge component — a piece of infrastructure that enables assets to move across different blockchains, Charles Guillemet, CTO of hardware wallet maker Ledger, told CoinDesk in a note.

Bridges typically work by locking assets on one chain and minting equivalent tokens on another. That process depends on a trusted entity — often called an oracle or validator — to confirm deposits.

In this case, Kelp effectively acted as that verifier. According to Guillemet, the system relied on a single-signer setup, meaning just one entity could approve any transactions.

“It seems the attacker was able to sign a message … allowing him to mint large amount of rsETH,” he said. He added that it remains unclear how that access was obtained.

Advertisement

Michael Egorov, founder of Curve Finance, pointed to the same weakness in the system’s configuration.

“Things can happen when you trust one single party — whoever that would be.”

That setup allowed the attacker to effectively create unbacked tokens, even though no corresponding assets were locked on the source chain.

Once minted, the tokens were quickly deployed. The attacker “immediately deposited them in lending protocols mostly Aave to borrow real ETH against,” Guillemet explained.

Advertisement

That maneuver shifted the problem from a single exploit into a broader market issue. DeFi lending platforms are now left holding collateral that may be difficult to unwind, while valuable and liquid assets are already drained.

“Aave was left with rsETH which cannot be really sold and maxborrowed [sic] ETH, so no one can withdraw ETH,” Curve’s Egorov said.

As a result, Aave and other lending protocols may be sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars in questionable collateral and bad debt, he warned, raising concerns of a potential “bank run” dynamic as users rush to withdraw funds.

Aave saw about a $6 billion drop in assets on the protocol as users yanked their assets following the incident. The token associated with the protocol was down about 15% over the past 24 hours’ trading.

Advertisement

What we still don’t know

Key questions remain around how the validator was compromised. The system relied on LayerZero’s official node, raising uncertainty over whether it was hacked, misconfigured or misled.

“Was it hacked? Was it fooled? We don’t know,” Egorov said.

The attacker’s identity is also unknown, though Guillemet said the scale of the attack suggests a sophisticated actor.

“Clearly not some script kiddies,” he said.

Advertisement

Big blow for trust in DeFi

Beyond the immediate losses, the exploit the episode serves as another reminder that as DeFi grows more interconnected, failures in one layer can quickly cascade across the system.

Egorov argued that non-isolated lending models, where assets share risk across pools, amplify the impact of such events.

He also pointed to shortcomings in how new assets are onboarded to lending platforms, saying configurations like Kelp’s 1-of-1 verifier setup should have been flagged earlier.

However, Egorov said there’s a silver lining. “Crypto is a harsh environment which no bank would have survived — yet we are working with that,” he said. “I think DeFi will learn from this incident and become stronger than before.”

Advertisement

Still, even as incidents like this lead to protocol upgrades and redesigns, they also chip away investor confidence in the broader DeFi sector.

“All in all, the trust into DeFi protocols is eroded by this kind of event,” Guillemet said.

“And 2026 will most likely be the worst year in terms of hacks, again,” he added.

Read more: ‘DeFi is dead’: crypto community scrambles after this year’s biggest hack exposes contagion risks

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

ZachXBT Flags Holder Concentration Concerns Tied to MemeCore

Published

on

ZachXBT Flags Holder Concentration Concerns Tied to MemeCore

Onchain investigator ZachXBT publicly challenged MemeCore on Monday to justify the valuation and supply distribution of its M token, asking the project to explain its market cap and why “insiders hold >90% of supply.”

“Please provide a single data point to support your $6B mkt cap at a top 20 token and why insiders hold >90% of supply,” wrote ZachXBT in a Monday X response to Memecore, a project advertising itself as the layer–1 blockchain for the “Meme 2.0 economy.”

The comments add fresh scrutiny to MemeCore after a sharp rally, though live valuation metrics differed across major trackers. CoinMarketCap ranked the token No. 21 at about $4.33 billion on Monday, while CoinGecko ranked it No. 20 at about $5.97 billion.

The second-largest holder, wallet “0x8b8,” held 50 million M tokens currently worth $178 million, representing 21.77% of the supply, according to blockchain data visualization platform Bubblemaps, which listed the Binance Deposit address as the largest holder with 41.3% of the supply.

Advertisement

However, the token holdings don’t necessarily point to coordinated activity, according to Bubblemaps blockchain data analyst 0xToolman, who told Cointelegraph that the “pattern looks like team holdings,” which may not be in circulation yet.

M token, top 250 holders by amount. Source: Bubblemaps

Cointelegraph has contacted MemeCore for comment on the matter and details surrounding the token’s distribution.

ZachXBT has not posted definitive blockchain data proving that 90% of the supply is held by insiders, but pledged to investigate the token after the recent meltdown of the Rave DAO (RAVE) token sent shockwaves across the industry.

Related: Suspected insider wallets rack up $1.2M betting on ZachXBT’s Axiom exposé

RAVE token’s 90% meltdown sparks insider concerns

On Saturday, ZachXBT accused RaveDAO of orchestrating a pump-and-dump scheme, citing concentrated token holdings and suspicious exchange flows, after the RAVE token soared from $0.25 to nearly $28 within days before crashing over 80%.

Advertisement

RaveDAO has denied any role in the token’s surge and collapse, Cointelegraph reported on Sunday. Both Binance and Bitget confirmed they are reviewing the situation.

The RAVE token fell 92% during the past week and was trading above $0.69 at 12:46 p.m. UTC on Monday, CoinMarketCap data shows.

RAVE/USD, 1-year chart. Source: CoinMarketCap

ZachXBT claimed that RAVE was just one of several tokens spotting “manipulation” signs on major exchanges.

“Other projects with highly questionable price action recently include: SIREN, MYX, COAI, M, PIPPIN, RIVER,” he wrote in a Saturday X post, pledging to investigate these price movements to identify the responsible parties.

Magazine: Meet the onchain crypto detectives fighting crime better than the cops

Advertisement