Up to $387.5 million on Bitget—does this mean a new withdrawal round?
According to Bitget’s latest explanation, this is to complete the statistics for the same incident; it is not another round of withdrawals. However, when the funds can be withdrawn is still uncertain. For users who need funds soon, it’s not advisable to plan deposits based on the notice. It’s better to hold off on non-essential top-ups.
The official update released on September 25 and reviewed again this morning raised the $351.6 million figure cited yesterday to $387.5 million. The reason is that Bitget added Zcash and TRON assets that had not been previously included. Cointelegraph also reported this adjustment, but both the amount and the reasons still come from the platform’s disclosure rather than an independent audit conclusion.
What the statistical update changes is the scale of a known incident. You can’t determine that withdrawals are still ongoing merely because the numbers have gotten larger. That said, the new estimate still isn’t final. The notice clearly states that subsequent tracking may continue to result in adjustments.
The platform also states that the vulnerability has been fixed and that some affected assets have been frozen. These developments are worth recording, but freezing does not mean the assets have been returned, nor does it mean user withdrawals have arrived. A fix statement also cannot replace verifying that operations are functioning normally after recovery.
As of this morning’s cross-check, the official “Withdrawals” page still says withdrawals are paused, with a commitment to publish withdrawal arrangements on September 26. “Publishing arrangements” is not a guarantee that withdrawals will resume that day, nor is it a guarantee for the timing of when funds arrive. First, today, verify which assets, networks, and time windows are actually enabled in the announced plan, and then check the real arrival status.
I will keep yesterday’s judgment that “loss responsibility and fund availability should be considered separately.” If the scope of recovery becomes clear and withdrawals continue to process successfully, I would lower the risk to fund availability. If the pause is extended further, or if additional abnormal withdrawals are found after the incident, I would raise the risk. I will not assert risk spreading just because the amount increased, and I will not treat risk as resolved merely because a fix has been announced.
#Bitget #资产安全 #Risk management
According to Bitget’s latest explanation, this is to complete the statistics for the same incident; it is not another round of withdrawals. However, when the funds can be withdrawn is still uncertain. For users who need funds soon, it’s not advisable to plan deposits based on the notice. It’s better to hold off on non-essential top-ups.
The official update released on September 25 and reviewed again this morning raised the $351.6 million figure cited yesterday to $387.5 million. The reason is that Bitget added Zcash and TRON assets that had not been previously included. Cointelegraph also reported this adjustment, but both the amount and the reasons still come from the platform’s disclosure rather than an independent audit conclusion.
What the statistical update changes is the scale of a known incident. You can’t determine that withdrawals are still ongoing merely because the numbers have gotten larger. That said, the new estimate still isn’t final. The notice clearly states that subsequent tracking may continue to result in adjustments.
The platform also states that the vulnerability has been fixed and that some affected assets have been frozen. These developments are worth recording, but freezing does not mean the assets have been returned, nor does it mean user withdrawals have arrived. A fix statement also cannot replace verifying that operations are functioning normally after recovery.
As of this morning’s cross-check, the official “Withdrawals” page still says withdrawals are paused, with a commitment to publish withdrawal arrangements on September 26. “Publishing arrangements” is not a guarantee that withdrawals will resume that day, nor is it a guarantee for the timing of when funds arrive. First, today, verify which assets, networks, and time windows are actually enabled in the announced plan, and then check the real arrival status.
I will keep yesterday’s judgment that “loss responsibility and fund availability should be considered separately.” If the scope of recovery becomes clear and withdrawals continue to process successfully, I would lower the risk to fund availability. If the pause is extended further, or if additional abnormal withdrawals are found after the incident, I would raise the risk. I will not assert risk spreading just because the amount increased, and I will not treat risk as resolved merely because a fix has been announced.
#Bitget #资产安全 #Risk management