Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

This Bitcoin mining pool lets users keep a whole BTC. It just found its second block

Published

on

This Bitcoin mining pool lets users keep a whole BTC. It just found its second block

A bitcoin mining pool built to reject both the industrial pay-per-share model and the pure lottery approach has now proved its design works. Twice.

Upstart mining pool Parasite Pool mined block 945,601 on Friday morning, its second block since launching in April 2025 and roughly 48 days after the pool’s first block at #938,713 in late February.

The block carried 7,398 transactions and 0.002 BTC in fees, landing with bitcoin trading at $76,213.

The pool operates on a hybrid model that has no parallel in mainstream mining. A winning miner that solves a block receives 1 BTC outright, with the remaining 2.125 BTC plus fees distributed proportionally among all pool participants based on shares submitted since the previous block.

Advertisement

There are no fees to take part in this pool, and payouts are routed through the Lightning Network.

Mining secures bitcoin by having computers compete to solve a cryptographic puzzle every 10 minutes, with the winner earning the right to add the next block of transactions to the blockchain and collecting a reward.

That reward is currently 3.125 BTC plus whatever transaction fees are bundled in, worth about $238,000 at Friday’s price, down from 6.25 BTC after the April 2024 halving and scheduled to drop again to 1.5625 BTC in 2028.

The competition is dominated by industrial operators running warehouse-scale facilities of specialized ASIC hardware that pulls enough electricity to rival a small city.

Advertisement

Mining pools exist to smooth the variance of who finds blocks, bundling the hashrate of thousands of participants so the proceeds get split by contribution rather than winner-take-all.

Parasite is founded by ZK Shark, the pseudonymous creator of Ordinal Maxi Biz (an NFT collection on Bitcoin), and targets the home miner.

Pure solo pools like CKpool pay the full block reward minus a 2% fee to the finder, but statistical reality means the vast majority of participants never see a block.

But Parasite’s answer is to split the difference. The 1 BTC finder’s fee preserves the lottery payday, while proportional distribution of the remainder keeps satoshis flowing to participants during the stretches between blocks.

Advertisement

The second block carries more weight than the first. The pool retained hashrate through the 48-day gap between payouts, and the proportional distribution mechanics now have two rounds of real validation rather than one.

Parasite’s hashrate currently sits at 52 petahashes per second, down from a peak of 182 PH/s in June 2025, according to the pool’s dashboard. That works out to roughly 0.005% of bitcoin’s estimated 1-zetahash network hashrate.

The pattern around solo and small-pool mining has been running hot.

CoinDesk reported earlier this year on a 230 terahash-per-second home miner who beat 1-in-28,000 odds to claim block 943,411 and a $210,000 reward, and on a separate operator who rented $75 of cloud hashrate to validate block 938,092 via CKpool for a $200,000 payday. Both wins followed the CKpool model of winner-take-all minus a 2% fee.

Advertisement

Parasite is the first pool at this scale to test whether a hybrid split keeps participants mining through the losing stretches. A third block inside the next two months would settle the case for Parasite’s model, while a six-month drought would suggest the first two were the easy ones.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Kelp Restaking Protocol Exploited, $293M Drained

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

DeFi markets faced another high-profile setback this weekend as Kelp, a liquid restaking protocol, disclosed a cyber attack targeting its rsETH restaking token. The incident prompted an immediate pause of rsETH smart contracts across Kelp’s mainnet and multiple Layer-2 networks as the project investigates potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Blockchain security firm Cyvers later pegged the damage at about $293 million, signaling a significant hit to users and counterparties tied to the restaking ecosystem.

Kelp stated on X that it detected suspicious cross-chain activity involving rsETH and subsequently halted rsETH contracts on mainnet and several Layer-2s to prevent further damage while the investigation unfolds. Cyvers added that the attacker exploited the rsETH adapter bridge—the software component that manages the rsETH token—allowing the drain of funds from the platform. The firm also noted that the attacker has been actively moving funds, with a substantial portion converted into Ethereum (ETH).

In the wake of the breach, the attacker’s on-chain activity has increasingly relied on a Tornado Cash mixer-funded address. Cyvers reported that roughly $250 million of the stolen funds had already been swapped into ETH, underscoring the challenge of tracing and recovering assets in the DeFi space once they leave the original contract domains.

Key takeaways

  • The Kelp rsETH attack reportedly drained about $293 million, triggering contract pauses across Kelp’s mainnet and several Layer-2 networks as investigators assess the damage.
  • The attacker targeted the rsETH adapter bridge, leveraging cross-chain dynamics that underscore risks inherent to DeFi composability and restaking ecosystems.
  • At least nine protocols with exposure to rsETH reportedly froze activity in response, while Aave moved to suspend rsETH markets on V3 and V4 to contain risk.
  • Approximately $250 million of the stolen funds have been converted to ETH, with the attacker utilizing a Tornado Cash mixer-funded address, complicating on-chain tracing efforts.

Attack details and ecosystem response

According to Kelp, the breach traces to irregular cross-chain activity linked to rsETH, prompting an immediate safety pause to contain potential further loss. The company’s moderation was swift, spanning mainnet and several Layer-2 deployments, as the team works through the incident. While Kelp is conducting its investigation, the broader DeFi community has begun to map the ripple effects beyond a single protocol.

Blockchain security firm Cyvers provided a stark figure for the loss, estimating the total at about $293 million. The firm’s analysis highlights the risk that bridges and adapters—components that enable tokens like rsETH to move across chains—present when vulnerabilities exist in the bridging layer. The incident aligns with a pattern of high-severity exploits aimed at cross-chain and interoperable DeFi primitives, where a single compromised bridge can force widespread disruption across multiple protocols.

Advertisement

In response to the breach, several DeFi platforms publicly paused or limited exposure to rsETH. Notably, Aave—one of the largest DeFi lenders—announced that rsETH markets had been frozen on its V3 and V4 deployments. Cyvers notes that at least nine protocols reportedly had exposure to rsETH and executed precautionary freezes or withdrawal restrictions as a precautionary measure to prevent cascading losses.

Analysts and observers have highlighted a core risk exposed by the incident: the compounding nature of DeFi’s composability. When multiple protocols rely on a shared token or bridge, a vulnerability in one hinge can reverberate across the entire network, forcing sudden risk management actions across an otherwise diversified ecosystem. Cyvers senior leadership emphasized to Cointelegraph that this is precisely the kind of incident that underscores the fragility and complexity of modern DeFi infrastructure when bridges and adapters are compromised.

Contextual backdrop: a string of cybersecurity incidents

The Kelp attack sits within a broader panorama of DeFi hacks observed over the past several months. In late April, Drift Protocol—a decentralized derivatives exchange—suffered a major exploit that drained roughly $280 million from the platform. Drift’s post-mortem described a months-long intrusion, noting the attackers’ alleged infiltration of developer machines and the eventual deployment of malware. The incident traced to a sophisticated operation that reportedly included access gained at a large crypto conference, followed by collaboration with the attackers before the breach unfolded.

Taken together, these events illuminate a persistent security challenge for the nascent DeFi stack: attackers are increasingly targeting the risk-prone layers of cross-chain interoperability and restaking mechanisms, where a single vulnerability can cascade into sizable losses across multiple protocols. Industry participants continue to debate the best path forward—ranging from more stringent bridge audit standards to enhanced multi-party computation (MPC) and formal verification for cross-chain components.

Advertisement

What this means for investors, users, and builders

For users and liquidity providers, the Kelp incident underscores the importance of understanding the specific risk profiles of restaking and cross-chain primitives. Restaking naturally introduces an expanded attack surface: while it offers potential yield enhancements, it also increases reliance on the security of adapter contracts and bridges that connect across layers of the ecosystem. Investors should monitor how protocols respond to such incidents, particularly regarding fund recovery efforts, contingency plans, and the timelines for resuming normal operations.

From a builder’s perspective, the episode highlights several priorities: rigorous security testing of bridge and adapter code, heightened monitoring for cross-chain anomalies, and clearer disclosure frameworks around incident response. The drift toward rapid, publicized pauses—while essential for risk containment—also presses for standardized playbooks so that platforms can coordinate responses without sacrificing user trust.

Regulators and policymakers may also take note of the evolving security landscape, especially as DeFi protocols broaden their engagement with restaking mechanisms and more intricate cross-chain flows. The balance between innovation and resilience will likely shape ongoing discussions around security best practices and capital-adequacy considerations for DeFi incumbents as they scale.

Closing perspective

As the Kelp investigation unfolds, observers will be watching for a clearer accounting of the breach’s root causes, the effectiveness of the emergency pauses, and any progress toward asset recovery. The incident, along with Drift’s earlier breach, reinforces a central theme for the crypto markets: cross-chain and restaking infrastructures demand heightened scrutiny, robust security postures, and coordinated risk management across the ecosystem. Readers should stay tuned for updates on Kelp’s findings, the status of rsETH across major platforms, and any new measures aimed at hardening DeFi’s interconnected layers.

Advertisement

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Kelp Hacked, Losses Climb to $293M As Other Protocols Impacted

Published

on

Cybercrime, Cybersecurity, Scams, Hacks

Kelp, a liquid restaking protocol, was the victim of a cyber attack on Saturday, causing the platform to pause smart contracts for its restaking token (rsETH), as it “investigates” the attack amid reports of hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.

“Earlier today, we identified suspicious cross-chain activity involving rsETH. We have paused rsETH contracts across mainnet and several Layer-2s,” the Kelp platform said in an X post.

The attacker exploited the rsETH adapter bridge contract, the software code that manages Kelp’s rsETH token, and drained the platform of about $293 million in funds, according to blockchain security firm Cyvers.

Cybercrime, Cybersecurity, Scams, Hacks
Source: Cyvers

The attacker used a Tornado Cash crypto mixer-funded address and has already converted about $250 million of the stolen funds to Ether (ETH), the native cryptocurrency of the Ethereum layer-1 blockchain network, Cyvers told Cointelegraph.

In response to the attack, decentralized finance (DeFi) platform Aave announced it had frozen rsETH markets on Aave V3 and V4. At least nine crypto protocols had exposure to the token and have frozen activity on their platforms in response, Cyvers said.

Advertisement
Cybercrime, Cybersecurity, Scams, Hacks
Source: Aave

“This is exactly the kind of incident that highlights the risks of composability in DeFi,” Deddy Lavid, CEO of Cyvers, told Cointelegraph. Cointelegraph reached out to Kelp but did not obtain a response by the time of publication. 

The incident is the latest in a string of cybersecurity hacks and exploits of crypto platforms over the last several months, as crypto losses from hacks and scams totaled about $482 million in Q1 2026.

Related: Fake Ledger Live app on Apple App Store drained $9.5M from victims: ZachXBT

Drift Protocol hacked for $280 million

Decentralized cryptocurrency exchange Drift Protocol also suffered an exploit in April, which drained the platform of about $280 million.

The Drift Protocol team said the attack took “months of deliberate preparation,” in which the team was infiltrated by suspected North Korean state-affiliated hackers.

Advertisement

In a post-mortem update, the Drift team said they met the attackers at a “major” crypto conference and collaborated with them for several months before the attackers deployed malware on developer machines and compromised the platform. 

Magazine: DeFi’s billion-dollar secret: The insiders responsible for hacks